Supra-Annular Self-Expanding Versus Balloon-Expandable Valves for Valve-in-Valve Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Abstract

Self-expanding (SE) and balloon-expandable (BE) transcatheter heart valves (THVs) have not been extensively studied in valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve replacement (ViV-TAVR). We compared outcomes of supra-annular SE and BE THVs used for ViV-TAVR via a retrospective analysis of institutional data (2013-2023) including all patients undergoing ViV-TAVR (TAVR in previous surgical AVR). Unmatched and propensity-matched (1:1) comparisons of clinical and echocardiographic outcomes were undertaken between SE and BE THV along with Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. A total of 315 patients undergoing ViV-TAVR were included of which 73% received a SE THV. Median age was 77 years and women comprised 42.5% of the population. Propensity-score matching (1:1) yielded 81 matched pairs. Implanted aortic valve size was comparable between the groups (23 mm [23-26] vs. 23mm [23-26], p=0.457). At 30 days following ViV-TAVR, the SE group had a lower mean aortic valve gradient (14 mmHg [11-18] vs. 17.5 mmHg [13-25], p=0.007). A higher number of BE patients had severe prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) (16% vs. 6.2%, p=0.04). At one-year follow-up, the SE group had a lower aortic valve gradient (14.0 mmHg [9.6-19] vs. 17 mmHg [13-25], p=0.04) compared to the BE group. 30-day mortality was 2.7% while one-year mortality was 7.5% and comparable between the groups. Survival and stroke incidence were similar in both groups up to 5 years. In conclusion, both SE and BE THVs had comparable survival following ViV-TAVR. The higher residual aortic valve gradients in BE THVs are likely due to valve design and warrant long-term evaluation for potential structural valve degeneration.