Advertisement

Impact of valvular resistance on aortic regurgitation after transcatheter aortic valve replacement according to the type of prosthesis

  • Masahiko Asami
  • Thomas Pilgrim
  • Stefan Stortecky
  • Dik Heg
  • Eva Roost
  • Stephan Windecker
  • Lukas HunzikerEmail author
Original Paper
  • 83 Downloads

Abstract

Background

The impact of aortic valvular resistance (VR) on the degree of post-transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) aortic regurgitation (AR) remains unclear. The objective of the study was to investigate the relationship between VR and paravalvular AR after TAVR.

Methods

Between August 2007 and December 2015, 708 TAVR patients had sufficient data to calculate VR before the intervention and were eligible for the present analysis. The patient population was dichotomized according to VR. The association between VR and post-TAVR AR was separately assessed by prosthesis type.

Results

Among patients with low VR (LVR; < 238 dynes/cm5), 176 (49.7%) patients were treated with balloon-expandable (BE) valves and 178 (51.3%) patients with self-expandable (SE) transcatheter valves. Among patients with high VR (HVR ≥ 238), 147 (41.5%) and 207 (68.5%) patients received BE and SE, respectively. Baseline characteristics were similar in both groups irrespective of the type of valve. Patients with HVR had a 2.5-fold risk of ≥ moderate post-TAVR AR compared to patients with LVR. Both, HVR (HRadj 2.45, 95% CI 1.33–4.51) and the use of SE (HRadj 3.11, 95% CI 1.66–5.82), emerged as independent predictors of ≥ moderate post-TAVR AR. Moderate or greater post-AR was consistently predicted in patients treated with SE (HRadj 2.42, 95% CI 1.22–4.80) irrespective of the level of VR.

Conclusions

HVR is associated with a nearly 2.5-fold increased risk of moderate or greater post-TAVR AR and is an independent predictor of post-TAVR AR.

Keywords

Aortic stenosis Post-procedural aortic regurgitation Transcatheter aortic valve replacement Right heart catheterization 

Abbreviations

AR

Aortic regurgitation

AS

Aortic stenosis

AVA

Aortic valve area

BE

Balloon-expandable valve

BMI

Body mass index

MACCE

Major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events

RHC

Right heart catheterization

SE

Self-expandable valve

TAVR

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement

VARC

The valve academic research consortium

VR

Valvular resistance

Notes

Acknowledgements

None.

Funding

None.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

Prof. Pilgrim has received research grants to his institution from Edwards Lifesciences, Symetis, and Biotronik; has received speaker fees from Boston Scientific; and has received reimbursement for travel expenses from St. Jude Medical. Prof. Windecker has received research grants to his institution from Abbott, Amgen, Boston, Biotronik, and St. Jude Medical. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose.

Supplementary material

392_2019_1469_MOESM1_ESM.docx (35 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 35 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Leon MB, Smith CR, Mack MJ, Makkar RR, Svensson LG, Kodali SK, Thourani VH, Tuzcu EM, Miller DC, Herrmann HC, Doshi D, Cohen DJ, Pichard AD, Kapadia S, Dewey T, Babaliaros V, Szeto WY, Williams MR, Kereiakes D, Zajarias A, Greason KL, Whisenant BK, Hodson RW, Moses JW, Trento A, Brown DL, Fearon WF, Pibarot P, Hahn RT, Jaber WA, Anderson WN, Alu MC, Webb JG, PARTNER 2 Investigators (2016) Transcatheter or surgical aortic-valve replacement in intermediate-risk patients. N Engl J Med 374:1609–1620CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Reardon MJ, Van Mieghem NM, Popma JJ, Kleiman NS, Søndergaard L, Mumtaz M, Adams DH, Deeb GM, Maini B, Gada H, Chetcuti S, Gleason T, Heiser J, Lange R, Merhi W, Oh JK, Olsen PS, Piazza N, Williams M, Windecker S, Yakubov SJ, Grube E, Makkar R, Lee JS, Conte J, Vang E, Nguyen H, Chang Y, Mugglin AS, Serruys PW, Kappetein AP, SURTAVI Investigators (2017) Surgical or transcatheter aortic-valve replacement in intermediate-risk patients. N Engl J Med 376:1321–1331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kodali SK, Williams MR, Smith CR, Svensson LG, Webb JG, Makkar RR, Fontana GP, Dewey TM, Thourani VH, Pichard AD, Fischbein M, Szeto WY, Lim S, Greason KL, Teirstein PS, Malaisrie SC, Douglas PS, Hahn RT, Whisenant B, Zajarias A, Wang D, Akin JJ, Anderson WN, Leon MB, PARTNER Trial Investigators (2012) Two-year outcomes after transcatheter or surgical aortic-valve replacement. N Engl J Med 2012(366):1686–1695CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Van Belle E, Juthier F, Susen S, Vincentelli A, Iung B, Dallongeville J, Eltchaninoff H, Laskar M, Leprince P, Lievre M, Banfi C, Auffray JL, Delhaye C, Donzeau-Gouge P, Chevreul K, Fajadet J, Leguerrier A, Prat A, Gilard M, Teiger E, FRANCE 2 Investigators (2014) Postprocedural aortic regurgitation in balloon-expandable and self-expandable transcatheter aortic valve replacement procedures: analysis of predictors and impact on long-term mortality: insights from the FRANCE2 Registry. Circulation 129:1415–1427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Zahn R, Werner N, Gerckens U, Linke A, Sievert H, Kahlert P, Hambrecht R, Sack S, Abdel-Wahab M, Hoffmann E, Zeymer U, Schneider S, German Transcatheter Aortic Valve Interventions—Registry investigators (2017) Five-year follow-up after transcatheter aortic valve implantation for symptomatic aortic stenosis. Heart 103:1970–1976Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Feldman TE, Reardon MJ, Rajagopal V, Makkar RR, Bajwa TK, Kleiman NS, Linke A, Kereiakes DJ, Waksman R, Thourani VH, Stoler RC, Mishkel GJ, Rizik DG, Iyer VS, Gleason TG, Tchétché D, Rovin JD, Buchbinder M, Meredith IT, Götberg M, Bjursten H, Meduri C, Salinger MH, Allocco DJ, Dawkins KD (2018) Effect of mechanically expanded vs self-expanding transcatheter aortic valve replacement on mortality and major adverse clinical events in high-risk patients with aortic stenosis: the REPRISE III randomized clinical trial. JAMA 319:27–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Binder RK, Stortecky S, Heg D, Tueller D, Jeger R, Toggweiler S, Pedrazzini G, Amann FW, Ferrari E, Noble S, Nietlispach F, Maisano F, Räber L, Roffi M, Grünenfelder J, Jüni P, Huber C, Windecker S, Wenaweser P (2015) Procedural results and clinical outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve implantation in switzerland: an observational cohort study of sapien 3 versus sapien XT transcatheter heart valves. Circ Cardiovasc Interv 8:e002653CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kim WK, Blumenstein J, Liebetrau C, Rolf A, Gaede L, Van Linden A, Arsalan M, Doss M, Tijssen JGP, Hamm CW, Walther T, Möllmann H (2017) Comparison of outcomes using balloon-expandable versus self-expanding transcatheter prostheses according to the extent of aortic valve calcification. Clin Res Cardiol 106:995–1004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Isaaz K, Munoz L, Ports T, Schiller NB (1991) Demonstration of postvalvuloplasty hemodynamic improvement in aortic stenosis based on Doppler measurement of valvular resistance. J Am Coll Cardiol 18:1661–1670CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wenaweser P, Pilgrim T, Kadner A, Huber C, Stortecky S, Buellesfeld L, Khattab AA, Meuli F, Roth N, Eberle B, Erdös G, Brinks H, Kalesan B, Meier B, Jüni P, Carrel T, Windecker S (2011) Clinical outcomes of patients with severe aortic stenosis at increased surgical risk according to treatment modality. J Am Coll Cardiol 58:2151–2162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kappetein AP, Head SJ, Généreux P, Piazza N, van Mieghem NM, Blackstone EH, Brott TG, Cohen DJ, Cutlip DE, van Es GA, Hahn RT, Kirtane AJ, Krucoff MW, Kodali S, Mack MJ, Mehran R, Rodés-Cabau J, Vranckx P, Webb JG, Windecker S, Serruys PW, Leon MB (2012) Updated standardized endpoint definitions for transcatheter aortic valve implantation: the Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 consensus document. J Am Coll Cardiol 60:1438–1454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Baumgartner H, Falk V, Bax JJ, De Bonis M, Hamm C, Holm PJ, Iung B, Lancellotti P, Lansac E, Rodriguez Muñoz D, Rosenhek R, Sjögren J, Tornos Mas P, Vahanian A, Walther T, Wendler O, Windecker S, Zamorano JL, ESC Scientific Document Group (2017) ESC/EACTS guidelines for the management of valvular heart disease. Eur Heart J 38:2739–2791CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Franzone A, O’Sullivan CJ, Stortecky S, Heg D, Lanz J, Vollenbroich R, Praz F, Piccolo R, Asami M, Roost E, Räber L, Valgimigli M, Windecker S, Pilgrim T (2017) Prognostic impact of invasive haemodynamic measurements in combination with clinical and echocardiographic characteristics on two-year clinical outcomes of patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation. EuroIntervention 12:e2186–e2193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cannon JD Jr, Zile MR, Crawford FA Jr, Carabello BA (1992) Aortic valve resistance as an adjunct to the Gorlin formula in assessing the severity of aortic stenosis in symptomatic patients. J Am Coll Cardiol 20:1517–1523CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jilaihawi H, Makkar RR, Kashif M, Okuyama K, Chakravarty T, Shiota T, Friede G, Nakamura M, Doctor N, Rafique A, Shibayama K, Mihara H, Trento A, Cheng W, Friedman J, Berman D, Fontana GP (2014) A revised methodology for aortic-valvar complex calcium quantification for transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging 15:1324–1332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Feldman T, Ford LE, Chiu YC, Carroll JD (1992) Changes in valvular resistance, power dissipation and myocardial reserve with aortic valvuloplasty. J Heart Valve Dis 1:55–64Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Casale PN, Palacios IF, Abascal VM, Harrell L, Davidoff R, Weyman AE, Fifer MA (1992) Effects of dobutamine on Gorlin and continuity equation valve areas and valve resistance in valvular aortic stenosis. Am J Cardiol 70:1175–1179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Morgan-Hughes GJ, Owens PE, Roobottom CA, Marshall AJ (2003) Three dimensional volume quantification of aortic valve calcification using multislice computed tomography. Heart 89:1191–1194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Seiffert M, Fujita B, Avanesov M, Lunau C, Schön G, Conradi L, Prashovikj E, Scholtz S, Börgermann J, Scholtz W, Schäfer U, Lund G, Ensminger S, Treede H (2016) Device landing zone calcification and its impact on residual regurgitation after transcatheter aortic valve implantation with different devices. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging 17:576–584CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ludman PF, Moat N, de Belder MA, Blackman DJ, Duncan A, Banya W, MacCarthy PA, Cunningham D, Wendler O, Marlee D, Hildick-Smith D, Young CP, Kovac J, Uren NG, Spyt T, Trivedi U, Howell J, Gray H (2015) UK TAVI steering committee and the national institute for cardiovascular outcomes research. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation in the United Kingdom: temporal trends, predictors of outcome, and 6-year follow-up: a report from the UK transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) registry 2007 to 2012. Circulation 131:1181–1190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Little SH, Oh JK, Gillam L, Sengupta PP, Orsinelli DA, Cavalcante JL, Chang JD, Adams DH, Zorn GL 3rd, Pollak AW, Abdelmoneim SS, Reardon MJ, Qiao H, Popma JJ (2016) Self-expanding transcatheter aortic valve replacement versus surgical valve replacement in patients at high risk for surgery: a study of echocardiographic change and risk prediction. Circ Cardiovasc Interv 9:e003426CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kodali S, Thourani VH, White J, Malaisrie SC, Lim S, Greason KL, Williams M, Guerrero M, Eisenhauer AC, Kapadia S, Kereiakes DJ, Herrmann HC, Babaliaros V, Szeto WY, Hahn RT, Pibarot P, Weissman NJ, Leipsic J, Blanke P, Whisenant BK, Suri RM, Makkar RR, Ayele GM, Svensson LG, Webb JG, Mack MJ, Smith CR, Leon MB (2016) Early clinical and echocardiographic outcomes after SAPIEN 3 transcatheter aortic valve replacement in inoperable, high-risk and intermediate-risk patients with aortic stenosis. Eur Heart J 37:2252–2262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bocksch W, Grossmann B, Geisler T, Steeg M, Droppa M, Jorbenadze R, Haap M, Gawaz M, Fateh-Moghadam S (2016) Clinical outcome and paravalvular leakage of the new balloon-expandable Edwards Sapien 3 valve in comparison to its predecessor model (Edwards Sapien XT) in patients undergoing transfemoral aortic valve replacement. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 88:466–475CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Baumgartner H, Hung J, Bermejo J, Chambers JB, Edvardsen T, Goldstein S, Lancellotti P, LeFevre M, Miller F Jr, Otto CM (2017) Recommendations on the echocardiographic assessment of aortic valve stenosis: a focused update from the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging and the American Society of Echocardiography. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 30:372–392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Falk V, Wöhrle J, Hildick-Smith D, Bleiziffer S, Blackman DJ, Abdel-Wahab M, Gerckens U, Linke A, Ince H, Wenaweser P, Allocco DJ, Dawkins KD, Van Mieghem NM (2017) Safety and efficacy of a repositionable and fully retrievable aortic valve used in routine clinical practice: the RESPOND study. Eur Heart J 38:3359–3366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Finkelstein A, Steinvil A, Rozenbaum Z, Halkin A, Banai S, Barbash I, Guetta V, Segev A, Danenberg H, Orvin K, Assa HV, Assali A, Kornowski R (2018) Efficacy and safety of new-generation transcatheter aortic valves: insights from the Israeli transcatheter aortic valve replacement registry. Clin Res Cardiol.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00392-018-1372-6 Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Masahiko Asami
    • 1
  • Thomas Pilgrim
    • 1
  • Stefan Stortecky
    • 1
  • Dik Heg
    • 2
  • Eva Roost
    • 3
  • Stephan Windecker
    • 1
  • Lukas Hunziker
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Cardiology, Swiss Cardiovascular CenterBern University HospitalBernSwitzerland
  2. 2.Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine and Clinical Trials UnitUniversity of BernBernSwitzerland
  3. 3.Department of Cardiac Surgery, Swiss Cardiovascular CenterBern University HospitalBernSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations