Advertisement

Aortic Stenosis Percutaneous Interventions

  • Ahmad Edris
  • Emin Murat Tuzcu
Chapter

Abstract

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement is a disruptive technology for the treatment of severe aortic stenosis. It has allowed for the treatment of high-risk and potentially inoperable aortic stenosis patients. The safety and efficacy of transcatheter aortic valve replacement has been evaluated rigorously in multiple pivotal randomized clinical trials. Advancements in the technology with significant improvement in clinical outcomes and safety of the procedure have allowed for the expansion of indications to lower-risk groups. Future development will focus on patient selection and continued device refinement and technique with further expansion to low-risk patients and other clinical indications.

References

  1. 1.
    Leon MB, Smith CR, Mack M, et al. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis in patients who cannot undergo surgery. N Engl J Med. 2010;363:1597–607.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Smith CR, Leon MB, Mack MJ, et al. Transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in high-risk patients. N Engl J Med. 2011;364:2187–98.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Adams DH, Popma JJ, Reardon MJ, et al. Transcatheter aortic-valve replacement with a self-expanding prosthesis. N Engl J Med. 2014;370:1790–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Thourani VH, Ailawadi G, Szeto WY, et al. Outcomes of surgical aortic valve replacement in high-risk patients: a multi-institutional study. Ann Thorac Surg. 2011;91:49–55; discussion 55-6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Andersen HR, Knudsen LL, Hasenkam JM. Transluminal implantation of artificial heart valves. Description of a new expandable aortic valve and initial results with implantation by catheter technique in closed chest pigs. Eur Heart J. 1992;13(5):704–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cribier A, Eltchaninoff H, Bash A, Borenstein N, Tron C, Bauer F, Derumeaux G, Anselme F, Laborde F, Leon MB. Percutaneous transcatheter implantation of an aortic valve prosthesis for calcific aortic stenosis. Circulation. 2002;106:3006–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Leon MB, Smith CR, Mack MJ, et al. Transcatheter or surgical aortic valve replacement in intermediate-risk patients. N Engl J Med. 2016;374:1609–20.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Nishimura RA, Otto CM, Bonow RO, et al. 2014 AHA/ACC guideline for the management of patients with valvular heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63:e57–185.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Authors/Task Force Members, Vahanian A, Alfieri O, et al. Guidelines on the management of valvular heart disease (version 2012): the joint Task Force on the management of valvular heart disease of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for CardioThoracic Surgery (EACTS). Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2012;42:S1–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Willson AB, Webb JG, Labounty TM, et al. 3-dimensional aortic annular assessment by multidetector computed tomography predicts moderate or severe paravalvular regurgitation after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a multicenter retrospective analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;59:1287–94.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Yang TH, Webb JG, Blanke P, et al. Incidence and severity of paravalvular aortic regurgitation with multidetector computed tomography nominal area oversizing or undersizing after transcatheter heart valve replacement with the Sapien 3: a comparison with the Sapien XT. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2015;8:462–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    O’Brien SM, Shahian DM, Filardo G, et al. The society of thoracic surgeons 2008 cardiac surgery risk models: part 2—isolated valve surgery. Ann Thorac Surg. 2009;88(1 Suppl):S23–42.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Shahian DM, O’Brien SM, Filardo G, et al. The society of thoracic surgeons 2008 cardiac surgery risk models: part 3—valve plus CABG surgery. Ann Thorac Surg. 2009;88(1 Suppl):S43–62.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Barili F, Pacini D, Capo A, et al. Does EuroSCORE II perform better than its original versions? A mulitcentre validation study. Eur Heart J. 2013;34(1):22–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Tribouilloy C, Levy F, Rusinaru D, et al. Outcome after aortic valve replacement for low-flow/ low-gradient aortic stenosis without contractile reserve on dobutamine stress echocardiography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;53:1865–73.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Levy F, Laurent M, Monin JL, et al. Aortic valve replacement for low-flow/low-gradient aortic stenosis operative risk stratification and long-term outcome: a European multicenter study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008;51:1466–72.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gotzmann M, Lindstaedt M, Bojara W, et al. Clinical outcome of transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients with low-flow, low gradient aortic stenosis. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2012;79:693–701.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Duncan A, Ludman P, Banya W, et al. Long-term outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement in high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis: the U.K. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation registry. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2015;8:645–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gilard M, Eltchaninoff H, Iung B, et al. For the FRANCE 2 investigators. Registry of transcatheter aortic-valve implantation in high-risk patients. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:1705–15.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Walther T, Hamm CW, Schuler G, et al. For the GARY Executive Board. Perioperative results and complications in 15,964 transcatheter aortic valve replacements: prospective data from the GARY registry. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;65:2173–80.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Popma JJ, Adams DH, Reardon MJ, et al. For the CoreValve United States clinical investigators. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement using a self-expanding bioprosthesis in patients with severe aortic stenosis at extreme risk for surgery. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63:1972–81.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Reynolds MR, Magnuson EA, Lei Y, et al. Health-related quality of life after transcatheter aortic valve replacement in inoperable patients with severe aortic stenosis. Circulation. 2011;124:1964–72.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Reynolds MR, Magnuson EA, Wang K, et al. Health-related quality of life after transcatheter or surgical aortic valve replacement in high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis: results from the PARTNER (Placement of AoRTic TraNscathetER Valve) trial (Cohort A). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;60:548–58.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Arnold SV, Afilalo J, Spertus JA, et al. Prediction of poor outcome after transcatheter aortic valve replacement. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016;68:1868–77.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Biancari F, Juvonen T, Onorati F, et al. Meta-analysis on the performance of the EuroScore II and the society of thoracic surgeons scores in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2014;28(6):1533–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ribeiro HB, Rodés-Cabau J. The multiparametric FRANCE-2 risk score: one step further in improving the clinical decision-making process in transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Heart. 2014;100(13):993–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Makkar RR, Fontana GP, Jilaihawi H, et al. Transcatheter aortic-valve replacement for inoperable severe aortic stenosis. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:1696–704.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Arnold SV, Reynolds MR, Lei Y, et al. Predictors of poor outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: results from the PARTNER (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valve) trial. Circulation. 2014;129:2682–90.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Arnold SV, Spertus JA, Lei Y, et al. How to define a poor outcome after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: conceptual framework and empirical observations from the Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valve (PARTNER) trial. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2013;6:591–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Stortecky S, Schoenenberger AW, Moser A, et al. Evaluation of multidimensional geriatric assessment as a predictor of mortality and cardiovascular events after transcatheter aortic valve implantation. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2012;5:489–96.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Afilalo J, Mottillo S, Eisenberg MJ, et al. Addition of frailty and disability to cardiac surgery risk scores identifies elderly patients at high risk of mortality or major morbidity. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2012;5(2):222–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Lindman BR, Alexander KP, O’Gara PT, et al. Futility, benefit, and transcatheter aortic valve replacement. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2014;7:707–16.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Durand E, Borz B, Godin M, et al. Transfemoral aortic valve replacement with the Edwards SAPIEN and Edwards SAPIEN XT prosthesis using exclusively local anesthesia and fluoroscopic guidance: feasibility and 30-day outcomes. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2012;5:461–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Motloch LJ, Rottlaender D, Reda S, et al. Local versus general anesthesia for transfemoral aortic valve implantation. Clin Res Cardiol. 2012;101:45–53.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Miller DC, Blackstone EH, Mack MJ, et al. Transcatheter (TAVR) versus surgical (AVR) aortic valve replacement: occurrence, hazard, risk factors, and consequences of neurologic events in the PARTNER trial. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2012;143(4):832–43.e13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Gada H, Kirtane AJ, Wang K, et al. Temporal trends in quality of life outcomes after transapical transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2015;8(4):338–46.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Blackstone EH, Suri RM, Rajeswaran J, et al. Propensity-matched comparisons of clinical outcomes after transapical or transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Circulation. 2015;131:1989–2000.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Greenbaum AB, O’Neill WW, Paone G, et al. Caval-aortic access to allow transcatheter aortic valve replacement in otherwise ineligible patients: initial human experience. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63(25):2795–804.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Schofer J, Colombo A, Klugmann S, et al. Prospective multicenter evaluation of the direct flow medical transcatheter aortic valve. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63:763–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Meredith IT, Worthley SG, Whitbourn RJ, et al. Transfemoral aortic valve replacement with the repositionable Lotus Valve System in high surgical risk patients: the REPRISE I study. EuroIntervention. 2014;9:1264–70.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Meredith Am IT, Walters DL, Dumonteil N, et al. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement for severe symptomatic aortic stenosis using a repositionable valve system: 30-day primary endpoint results from the REPRISE II study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64:1339–48.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Treede H, Mohr FW, Baldus S, et al. Transapical transcatheter aortic valve implantation using the JenaValve system: acute and 30-day results of the multicentre CE-mark study. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2012;41:e131–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Abdel-Wahab M, Mehilli J, Frerker C, et al. Comparison of balloon- expandable vs self-expandable valves in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement: the CHOICE randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2014;311:1503–14.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Abdel-Wahab M, Neumann FJ, Mehilli J, et al. 1-year outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement with balloon-expandable versus self-expandable valves: results from the CHOICE randomized clinical trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;66:791–800.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Barbanti M, Yang TH, Rodés-Cabau J, et al. Anatomical and procedural features associated with aortic root rupture during balloon-expandable transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Circulation. 2013;128:244–53.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Pasic M, Unbehaun A, Buz S, et al. Annular rupture during transcatheter aortic valve replacement: classification, pathophysiology, diagnostics, treatment approaches, and prevention. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2015;8:1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Ribeiro HB, Webb JG, Makkar RR, et al. Predictive factors, management, and clinical outcomes of coronary obstruction following transcatheter aortic valve implantation: insights from a large multicenter registry. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;62:1552–62.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Kodali S, Pibarot P, Douglas PS, et al. Paravalvular regurgitation after transcatheter aortic valve replacement with the Edwards Sapien valve in the PARTNER trial: characterizing patients and impact on outcomes. Eur Heart J. 2015;36(7):449–56.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Patsalis PC, Al-Rashid F, Neumann T, et al. Preparatory balloon aortic valvuloplasty during transcatheter aortic valve implantation for improved valve sizing. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2013;6:965–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Piazza N, de Jaegere P, Schultz C, et al. Anatomy of the aortic valvar complex and its implications for transcatheter implantation of the aortic valve. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2008;1:74–81.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Tzamtzis S, Viquerat J, Yap J, et al. Numerical analysis of the radial force produced by the Medtronic-CoreValve and Edwards-SAPIEN after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Med Eng Phys. 2013;35:125–30.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Dangas GD, Lefèvre T, Kupatt C, et al. Bivalirudin versus heparin anticoagulation in transcatheter aortic valve replacement: the randomized BRAVO-3 trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;66:2860–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Makkar RR, Fontana G, Jilaihawi H, et al. Possible subclinical leaflet thrombosis in bioprosthetic aortic valves. N Engl J Med. 2015;373:2015–24.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Iung B. Interface between valve disease and ischaemic heart disease. Heart. 2000;84:347–52.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Rapp AH, Hillis LD, Lange RA, et al. Prevalence of coronary artery disease in patients with aortic stenosis with and without angina pectoris. Am J Cardiol. 2001;87:1216–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Tonino PA, De Bruyne B, Pijls NHJ, et al. Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention. N Engl J Med. 2009;360:213–24.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    De Bruyne B, Pijls NHJ, Kalesan B, et al. Fractional flow reserve-guided PCI versus medical therapy in stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:991–1001.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Tjang YS, Korfer R, Grobbee DE. Predictors of mortality after aortic valve replacement. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2007;32:469–74.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Brennan JM, Edwards FH, Zhao Y, et al. Long-term survival after aortic valve replacement among high-risk elderly patients in the United States: insights from the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Surgery Database, 1991 to 2007. Circulation. 2012;126:1621–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Holzhey D, Mohr FW, Walther T, et al. Current results of surgical aortic valve replacement: insights from the German aortic valve registry. Ann Thorac Surg. 2016;101:658–66.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Beach JM, Mihaljevic T, Svensson LG, et al. Coronary artery disease and outcomes of aortic valve replacement for severe aortic stenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;61:837–48.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Ussia GP, Barbanti M, Colombo A, et al. Impact of coronary artery disease in elderly patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation: insight from the Italian CoreValve registry. Int J Cardiol. 2013;167:943–50.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Gautier M, Pepin M, Himbert D, et al. Impact of coronary artery disease on indications for transcatheter aortic valve implantation and on procedural outcomes. EuroIntervention. 2011;7:549–55.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Van Mieghem NM, Van der Boon RM, Faqiri E, et al. Complete revascularization is not a prerequisite for success in current transcatheter aortic valve implantation practice. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2013;6:867–75.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Paradis JM, Fried J, Nazif T, et al. Aortic stenosis and coronary artery disease: what do we know? What don’t we know? A comprehensive review of the literature with proposed treatment algorithms. Eur Heart J. 2014;35(31):2069–82.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Mylotte D, Lefevre T, Søndergaard L, et al. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in bicuspid aortic valve disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64:2330–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Jilaihawi H, Chen M, Webb J, et al. A bicuspid aortic valve imaging classification for the TAVR era. J Am Coll Cardiol Img. 2016;9:1145–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Dvir D, Webb JG, Bleiziffer S, et al. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation in failed bioprosthetic surgical valves. JAMA. 2014;312:162–70.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Gurvitch R, Cheung A, Bedogni F, et al. Coronary obstruction following transcatheter aortic valve-in-valve implantation for failed surgical bioprostheses. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2011;77:439–44.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Ye J, Cheung A, Yamashita M, et al. Transcatheter aortic and mitral valve-in-valve implantation for failed surgical bioprosthetic valves: an 8-year single-center experience. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;8(13):1735–44.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Bapat VN, Attia R, Thomas M. Effect of valve design on the stent internal diameter of a bioprosthetic valve: a concept of true internal diameter and its implications for the valve-in-valve procedure. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2014;7:115–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Kodali S, Thourani VH, White J, et al. 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. 2016;37(28):2252–62.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Kapadia S, Agarwal S, Miller C, et al. Insights into timing, risk factors, and outcomes of stroke or transient ischemic attach after transcatheter aortic valve replacement in the PARTNER trial. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;9:e002981.  https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.115.002981.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Messé SR, Acker MA, Kasner SE, et al. Stroke after aortic valve surgery: results from a perspective cohort. Circulation. 2014;129(22):2253–61.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Herrmann H, Thourani VH, Kodali SK, et al. One-year clinical outcomes with SAPIEN 3 transcatheter aortic valve replacement in high-risk and inoperable patients with severe aortic stenosis. Circulation. 2016;134:130–40.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Gnéréux P, Webb JG, Svensson LG, et al. Vascular complication after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: insights from the PARTNER trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;60(12):1043–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Khawaja MZ, Rajani R, Cook A, et al. Permanent pacemaker insertion after CoreValve transcatheter aortic valve implantation: incidence and contributing factors. Circulation. 2011;123:951–60.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Tzikas A, van Dalen BM, Van Mieghem NM, et al. Frequency of conduction abnormalities after transcatheter aortic valve implantation with the Medtronic-CoreValve and the effect on left ventricular ejection fraction. Am J Cardiol. 2011;107:285–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Aktug O, Dohmen G, Brehmer K, et al. Incidence and predictors of left bundle branch block after transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Int J Cardiol. 2012;160:26–30.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Urena M, Mok M, Serra V, et al. Predictive factors and long-term clinical consequences of persistent left bundle branch block following transcatheter aortic valve implantation with a balloon-expandable valve. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;60:1743–52.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Laynez A, Ben-Dor I, Barbash IM, et al. Frequency of conduction disturbances after Edwards SAPIEN percutaneous valve implantation. Am J Cardiol. 2012;110:1164–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Nazif TM, Willams MR, Hahn RT, et al. Clinical implications of new-onset left bundle branch block after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: analysis of the PARTNER experience. Eur Heart J. 2014;35:1599–607.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Linke A, Wenaweser P, Gerckens U, et al. Treatment of aortic stenosis with a self-expanding transcatheter valve: the International Multicentre ADVANCE Study. Eur Heart J. 2014;35:2672–84.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Mack MJ, Brennan JM, Brindis R, et al. Outcomes following transcatheter aortic valve replacement in the United States. JAMA. 2013;310:2069–77.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Thyregod HG, Steinbrüchel DA, Ihlemann N, et al. Transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with severe aortic valve stenosis: 1-year results from the all-comers NOTION randomized clinical trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;65:2184–94.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Søndergaard L, Steinbrüchel DA, Ihlemann N, et al. Two-year outcomes in patients with severe aortic valve stenosis randomized to transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement: the all-comers NOTION randomized clinical trial. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;9(6):pii: e003665.  https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.115.003665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Thourani VH, Kodali S, Makkar RR, et al. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement versus surgical valve replacement in intermediate-risk patients: a propensity score analysis. Lancet. 2016;387:2218–25.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Werner N. Patients at intermediate surgical risk undergoing isolated interventional or surgical aortic valve replacement for severe symptomatic aortic valve stenosis. One year results from the GARY registry. Presented at: American Heart Association Scientific Sessions 2016. New Orleans, LA. 13 Nov 2016.Google Scholar
  89. 89.
    Kapadia SR, Leon MB, Makkar RR, et al. 5-year outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement compared with standard treatment for patients with inoperable aortic stenosis (PARTNER 1): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2015;385:2485–91.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Mack MJ, Leon MB, Smith CR, et al. 5-year outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement or surgical aortic valve replacement for high surgical risk patients with aortic stenosis (PARTNER 1): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2015;385:2477–84.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Généreux P, Head SJ, Van Mieghem NM, et al. Clinical outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement using valve academic research consortium definitions. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;59(25):2317–26.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Astarci P, Glineur D, Kefer J, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging evaluation of cerebral embolization during percutaneous aortic valve implantation. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2011;40(2):475–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Fairbairn TA, Mather AN, Bijsterveld P, et al. Diffusion-weighted MRI determined cerebral embolic infarction following transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Heart. 2012;98(1):18–23.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Haussig S, Mangner N, Dwyer MG, et al. Effect of cerebral protection device on brain lesions following transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients with severe aortic stenosis. JAMA. 2016;316(6):592–601.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Kapadia SR, Kodali S, Makkar R, et al.. Cerebral embolic protection during transcatheter aortic valve replacement. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016; pii: S0735–1097(16)36768–7.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2016.10.023.
  96. 96.
    Cheung DY, Duan B, Butcher JT. Current progress in tissue engineering of heart valves: multiscale problems, multiscale solutions. Expert Opin Biol Ther. 2015;15:1155–72.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Meredith IT, Walters DL, Dumonteil N, et al. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement for severe symptomatic aortic stenosis using a repositionable valve system: 30-day primary endpoint results from the REPRISE II study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64(13):1339–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Meredith IT, Walters DL, Dumonteil N, et al. 1-year outcomes with the fully repositionable and retrievable Lotus transcatheter aortic replacement valve in 120 high-risk surgical patient with severe aortic stenosis: results of the REPIRSE II study. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;9(4):376–84.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Lefèvre T, Colombo A, Tchétché D, et al. Prospective multicenter evaluation of the direct flow medical transcatheter aortic valve system: 12-month outcomes of the evaluation of the DISCOVER study. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;9(1):68–75.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Silaschi M, Treede H, Rastan AJ, et al. The JUPITER registry: 1-year results of transapical aortic valve implantation using a second-generation transcatheter heart valve in patients with aortic stenosis. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2016;50(5):874–81.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Athappan G, Gajulapalli RD, Tuzcu EM, et al. A systematic review on the safety of second-generation transcatheter aortic valves. EuroIntervention. 2016;11:1034–43.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    Agarwal S, Tuzcu EM, Krishnaswamy A, et al. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement: current perspectives and future implications. Heart. 2015;101:169–77.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    Vahl TP, Kodali SK, Leon MB. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement 2016: a modern day “through the looking-glass” adventure. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016;67(12):1472–87.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Cleveland Clinic Abu Dhabi, Heart & Vascular InstituteAbu DhabiUnited Arab Emirates

Personalised recommendations