As technology advances, current evidence supports the use of devices for valvular heart disease interventions, including transcatheter aortic valve implantation, transcatheter mitral or tricuspid valve repair, and transcatheter mitral valve implantation. These procedures require antithrombotic therapy to prevent thromboembolic events during the perioperative period, and these therapies are associated with an increased risk of bleeding complications. To date, there are challenges and controversies regarding how to balance the risk of thrombosis and bleeding in these patients, and therefore the optimal antithrombotic regimen remains unclear. In this review, we summarize the current evidence for antithrombotic therapy after transcatheter intervention in patients with valvular heart disease and highlight the importance of an individualized approach in targeting these patients.
Objective To discuss the key points of anesthesia for patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) surgery. Methods We retrospectively collected and analyzed the data of 70 patients who underwent TAVI in the Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, West China Hospital from March 2014 to October 2015. There were 39 males and 31 females with an average age of 73.7±4.5 years. The perioperative preparation and anesthesia points of TAVI were summarized. Results All of the 70 included patients were aged and at high risk severe comorbidities such as ischemic heart disease and stroke. The aortic stenosis and regurgitation occurred in 39 and 31 patients respectively. No patients died during the surgery. The total success rate was 95.7%. Conclusion TAVI is a complex procedure for high risk patients and need more attention during anesthesia. The successful conduction of the procedure requires the whole team to prepare carefully and cooperate closely.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the anticoagulation efficacy of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) and vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in patients with high-risk atrial fibrillation (AF) undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). MethodsA computer-based search was conducted on PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, CNKI, SinoMed, and VIP databases to identify studies on the application of NOACs and VKAs in high-risk AF patients after TAVI. The search period was from database inception to January 2023. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk assessment tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4 software. ResultsA total of 7 studies involving 24 592 patients were included. The meta-analysis results showed that compared to patients using VKAs, those treated with NOACs had a significantly lower risk of all-cause mortality [RR=0.74, 95%CI (0.58, 0.94), P=0.01]. Subgroup analysis indicated that when the follow-up period was less than 1 year, there was no significant difference in all-cause mortality between the NOAC and VKA groups [RR=0.57, 95%CI (0.17, 1.88), P=0.35]; however, when the follow-up period was ≥1 year, the VKA group had a higher all-cause mortality rate than the NOAC group, with a statistically significant difference [RR=0.73, 95%CI (0.57, 0.95), P=0.02]. No significant differences were found between the two groups regarding early stroke [RR=0.50, 95%CI (0.19, 1.28), P=0.15], stroke during follow-up [RR=1.04, 95%CI (0.88, 1.22), P=0.64], bleeding [RR=0.94, 95%CI (0.73, 1.21), P=0.61], major or life-threatening bleeding [RR=0.80, 95%CI (0.49, 1.31), P=0.38], or acute kidney injury [RR=0.51, 95%CI (0.16, 1.59), P=0.24]. Conclusion Compared to VKAs, the use of NOACs in patients with high-risk AF undergoing TAVI may reduce the risk of all-cause mortality, especially during long-term anticoagulation therapy, potentially offering greater benefits. However, further evidence from randomized controlled trials is needed to confirm these findings.
Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is an important alternative in treating high-risk patients with aortic valve regurgitation. Transcatheter tricuspid valve implantation (TTVI) is also an important treatment option for high-risk patients with tricuspid regurgitation. We reported a 72-year male patient who underwent TAVI due to severe aortic valve regurgitation using a J-Valve. During a two-year follow-up, the patient developed secondary tricuspid regurgitation to atrial fibrillation, and subsequently received TTVI using a LuX-Valve. Following the interventions, the patient's symptoms were significantly improved, and echocardiography indicated good hemodynamic performance of both transcatheter heart valves. This case highlights the feasibility and effectiveness of performing multiple valve implantations via transcatheter approaches in high-risk elderly patients.
ObjectiveTo summarize the clinical experience in the treatment of high-risk patients with severe aortic valve disease by transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) via heart apex approach and to evaluate the early efficacy.MethodFive patients who underwent TAVI via heart apex approach from September 2017 to February 2019 in Henan Thoracic Hospital were retrospectively analyzed, including 3 males and 2 females, aged 65-84 (74.6±4.5) years.ResultAll operations were performed through a small left incision into the thoracic cavity (3-5 cm), and then through the J-Valve transport system, the aortic valve was successfully released via heart apex after precise positioning under digital subtraction angiography. One patient developed ventricular fibrillation during the operation, and the operation was completed with the assistance of emergency femoral arteriovenous catheterization cardiopulmonary bypass; one patient underwent percutaneous coronary intervention first because of severe coronary stenosis; one patient had paroxysmal atrial fibrillation during the perioperative period, and had hepatorenal insufficiency and thrombocytopenia after the operation, and was improved after medical treatment; one patient had perivalvular leak during the operation, and was improved after re-implantation of the valve; one patient was in stable condition during operation and recovered smoothly after operation. Surgery was successful in all 5 patients. The follow-up time was 2-19 months, and the early clinical effect was good.ConclusionThe short-term clinical efficacy of TAVI via heart apex approach in the treatment of high-risk severe aortic valve disease is definite and safe, but the long-term and medium-term effects need to be further evaluated.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the clinical outcomes of sutureless aortic valve replacement (SU-AVR) and transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) for aortic valve disease. MethodsWe conducted a computer-based search of databases including CNKI, WanFang Data, VIP, CBM, PubMed, The Cochrane Library, EMbase and Web of Science from the inception of the databases to March 2024. Two reviewers independently screened articles, extracted data and used the Cochrane bias risk assessment tool to evaluate the quality of the included studies. Meta-analysis was performed using Stata 18 software. ResultsThe included 17 studies using propensity-matched analysis consisted of 6 630 patients, including 3 319 patients in the SU-AVR group and 3 311 patients in the TAVI group. The SU-AVR group had lower mortality than the TAVI group at 1-year ［RR=0.58, 95%CI(0.38, 0.87), P=0.009］, 2-year ［RR=0.61, 95%CI(0.43,0.85), P=0.004］ and 5-year ［RR=0.63, 95%CI(0.50,0.79), P=0.000］. The SU-AVR group had a significantly lower rate of new permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) ［RR=0.75, 95%CI(0.58, 0.98), P=0.037］, moderate-to-severe paravalvular leak (PVL) ［RR=0.20, 95%CI（0.12, 0.32）, P=0.000］, myocardial infarction(MI)［RR=0.30, 95%CI (0.11,0.80), P=0.017］, more-than-mild residual aortic regurgitation (AR)［RR=0.29, 95%CI（0.17, 0.48）, P=0.000］. In addition, the SU-AVR group had a higher postoperative mean aortic gradient [SMD=0.39, 95%CI (0.17, 0.62), P=0.000］than the TAVI group. Conclusion The early and mid-term clinical outcomes of SU-AVR were superior compared to TAVI.
A 71-year-old male presented with esophageal cancer and severe aortic valve regurgitation. Treatment strategies for such patients are controversial. Considering the risks of cardiopulmonary bypass and potential esophageal cancer metastasis, we successfully performed transcatheter aortic valve implantation and minimally invasive three-incision thoracolaparoscopy combined with radical resection of esophageal cancer (McKeown) simultaneously in the elderly patient who did not require neoadjuvant treatment. This dual minimally invasive procedure took 6 hours and the patient recovered smoothly without any surgical complications.
The purpose of this study was to explore the feasibility of dual-source computed tomography (DSCT) high-pitch scan mode in the preoperative evaluation of severe aortic stenosis (AS) referred to transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Thirty patients with severe AS referred for TAVI underwent cervico-femoral artery joint DSCT angiography. Measurement and calculation of contrast, contrast noise ratio (CNR) and noise of aorta and access vessels were performed. The intra-and inter-observer reproducibilities for assessing aortic root and access vessels were evaluated. Evaluation of shape and plagues of aorta and access vessels was performed. The contrast, CNR and noise of aorta and access vessels were 348.2~457.9 HU, 12.2~30.3 HU and 19.1~48.1 HU, respectively. There were good intra-and inter-observer reproducibilities in assessing aortic root and access vessels by DSCT (mean difference:-0.73~0.79 mm, r=0.90~0.98, P < 0.001; mean difference:-0.70~0.73 mm, r=0.90~0.96, P < 0.001). In the 30 patients, the diameters of external iliac artery, femeral artery or subclavian artery were less than 7 mm in 5 cases (16.7%), marked calcification in bilateral common iliac arteries in 1 case (3.3%) and marked soft plaque in left common iliac artery in 1 case (3.3%). DSCT high-pitch scan mode was feasible in the preoperative evaluation of aorta and access vessels in patients with AS referred for TAVI.
Objective To summarize the short-term results of valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation (ViV-TAVI) in the treatment of bioprosthetic valve failure after aortic valve replacement. Methods We reviewed the clinical data of patients who underwent ViV-TAVI from 2021 to 2022 in the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University. The valve function was evaluated by echocardiography before operation, immediately after operation and 3 months after operation. The all-cause death and main complications during hospitalization were analyzed. Results A total of 13 patients were enrolled, including 8 males and 5 females with a mean age of (65.9±8.5) years, and the interval time between aortic valve replacement and ViV-TAVI was (8.5±3.4) years. The Society of Thoracic Surgeons mortality risk score was 10.3%±3.2%. None of the 13 patients had abnormal valve function after operation. The mean transvalvular pressure gradient of aortic valve was decreased (P<0.001), the peak flow velocity of aortic valve was decreased (P<0.001), and the left ventricular ejection fraction was not changed significantly (P=0.480). There were slight perivalvular leakage in 2 patients and slight valve regurgitation in 3 patients. Three months after operation, the mean transvalvular pressure difference and peak flow velocity of aortic valve in 12 patients were significantly decreased compared with those before operation (P≤0.001). Conclusion This study demonstrates that ViV-TAVI for the treatment of bioprosthetic valve failure after aortic valve replacement is associated with favorable clinical and functional cardiovascular benefits, the short-term results are satisfactory.
For patients with aortic valve disease who require replacement of their native valve, surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) has been the standard of care. Due to the hemorrhage and thromboembolic risks of long-term anticoagulation therapy for mechanical prosthesis, bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement (AVR) has a trend to be used in younger patients, which raising the concern for the durability of bioprosthetic valves. The newly published 5-year outcomes of PERIGON trial, with no structural valve deterioration, again demonstrated the favorable durability of the new generation bioprosthetic valves, further providing the evidence of using bioprosthetic AVR in younger patients. At the meantime, the rapid progress of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has brought a new treatment option. For younger patients with low risks, choosing SAVR or TAVI becomes a critical decision. This paper reviews the outcomes of PERIGON trial and its implications to the clinical practice and research of bioprosthetic AVR.