Late migration of transcatheter aortic valve replacement prosthesis

Successful bridge to lung transplantation with transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

Beyond the hammer: The future of cardiothoracic surgery

Recommendations for Transesophageal Echocardiographic Screening in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Insights for the Cardiothoracic Anesthesiologist

Robotic aortic valve replacement

Impact of frailty on outcomes and readmissions after transcatheter and surgical aortic valve replacement in a national cohort

The Deployment of Valve Academic Research Consortium 3 (VARC-3): New Endpoints, Broader Definitions, and Plenty of Unanswered Questions

On 16 April 2002, my colleagues and I performed, in an inoperable and desperately ill man with critical calcific aortic stenosis (AS), the first clinical percutaneous implantation of an aortic valve bioprosthesis. As of 2013, more than 80,000 patients have been treated; and transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), so strongly criticized by all the experts throughout the early years, continues to grow in parallel with its constant technological improvements. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement can now be recognized as a medical breakthrough. It is a revolutionary technology that meets an unfulfilled clinical need for a common disease, is validated by rigorous evidence-based studies, and is applicable worldwide. We report here the main phases of this 20-year odyssey and briefly consider the prospects of TAVR, which remains in continuous development.

Self-Expanding Versus Balloon-Expandable Valve: Are We at the Cusp of Delivering a Perfect Transcatheter Aortic Valve?

Is an aortic tissue valve the best choice for young adults?

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement valve-in-valve: Future implications for the surgeon

The aim of this study was to identify anatomical variations in coronary artery orifices among high-risk patients with a small aortic root undergoing bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement (BAVR) and transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in order to prevent coronary orifice obstruction perioperatively. Coronary orifice and root structure were identified in 400 patients using aortic multidetector-row computed tomography (MDCT). We measured the aortic root diameter; intercommissural distances; and distance from coronary orifice to valve annulus, commissure, and sinotubular junction. We examined positional relationships between the coronary orifice and stent post, or sewing cuff of the bioprosthetic valve and leaflet of the transcatheter aortic valve. Most left coronary artery orifices were distributed near the center of the non-left and left-right commissures; right ones were relatively distributed on the non-right commissural side. Thirty-four patients (8.5%) with BAVR (coronary orifice near the commissure: 31, 7.8%; low takeoff: 5, 1.3%; and both: 2) and 39 (9.8%) with TAVR were at risk for coronary orifice obstruction. During BAVR, one-stitch rotation of the stent and one-stitch rotation with intra-annular implantation were used in near-commissure and low takeoff cases, respectively. During TAVR, percutaneous coronary intervention may be required in the height of the coronary orifice was ≤10 mm from the base of the ventricle aortic junction. Potential coronary complications during BAVR and TAVR in high-risk patients for coronary obstruction were identified using preoperative aortic MDCT. Choice of appropriate surgical technique or valve is essential.

Decreasing Prices but Increasing Demand for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.

Background Referral rates and outcomes of cardiac rehabilitation have not been evaluated in patients with transcatheter aortic valve replacement or compared with surgical aortic valve replacement. Method A retrospective cohort study was conducted in 488 patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement ( n = 199) and surgical aortic valve replacement ( n = 289) from a university-based statewide transcatheter aortic valve replacement/surgical aortic valve replacement program during 2015-2017. Cardiac rehabilitation consisted of supervised exercise, diet education, and stress and depression management. We compared changes from baseline in exercise duration and intensity during cardiac rehabilitation sessions, quality-of-life (36-Item Short-Form Health Survey), and psychosocial measures (anxiety, depression, mood, social support, and diet) between transcatheter aortic valve replacement and surgical aortic valve replacement patients using t-test and chi-square analyses. Results Of 488 patients, cardiac rehabilitation referral rates were similar at 41% (transcatheter aortic valve replacement 81/199 versus surgical aortic valve replacement 117/289), but enrollment rates were lower in transcatheter aortic valve replacement (27/199, 14%) versus surgical aortic valve replacement (102/289, 35%, p < 0.01). Among eligible patients, cardiac rehabilitation completion rates were lower in transcatheter aortic valve replacement (12%) than surgical aortic valve replacement (32%). Exercise intensity during cardiac rehabilitation improved in both groups in a similar fashion (transcatheter aortic valve replacement 1.03 ± 1.09 versus surgical aortic valve replacement 1.34 ± 1.15 metabolic equivalents), but increase in exercise duration was higher in transcatheter aortic valve replacement patients versus surgical aortic valve replacement patients (14.52 ± 6.42 versus 10.67 ± 8.38 min, p = 0.02). Improvement in physical composite score was higher in surgical aortic valve replacement versus transcatheter aortic valve replacement (8.72 ± 7.87 versus 2.36 ± 7.6, p = 0.02) while improvement in mental composite score was higher in transcatheter aortic valve replacement (8.19 ± 8.50) versus surgical aortic valve replacement (1.18 ± 7.23, p = 0.02). There was no significant difference between the two groups in improvement in psychosocial measures. Conclusion Cardiac rehabilitation enrollment was low in transcatheter aortic valve replacement patients versus surgical aortic valve replacement patients despite similar referral rates. Improvement in functional and quality-of-life performance was achieved in both transcatheter aortic valve replacement and surgical aortic valve replacement. Future studies should address obstacles for enrollment of transcatheter aortic valve replacement patients.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Dissemination: The More the Merrier or Too Much of a Good Thing?

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Era.