Vol. 44 | No. 1 | January-June 2016 Back

Open Access

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement with the CoreValve in High- Risk, Extra-High-Risk, or Inoperable Patients: Midterm Follow-Up, the St. Luke’s Global City Heart Institute Experience

Fabio Enrique B. Posas, Ferdinand V. Alzate, Ofelia A. Najos-Valencia, Ruth Marie M. Divinagracia, Dahlia Virginia Estrera-Benavidez, Fontini Christi M. Carbon Cuenca, Sheryl Santos-Tuscano, Estanislao E. De Castro
Jun 2016 DOI 10.69944/pjc.240947f443

Abstract

Background: Symptomatic, severe aortic stenosis (AS) is a potentially life-threatening and functionally limiting disease that typically affects the elderly. Such patients often have multiple comorbidities, which adversely influence outcomes of surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). As an effective minimally invasive valve replacement technique for high-risk patients with severe symptomatic AS, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is comparable to SAVR. This study reports the authors’ TAVR experience with the CoreValve THV (Medtronic) in 51 high-risk, extra-high-risk, or inoperable patients with severe aortic valve disease. 

Methods: All patients were assessed and risk stratified by a multidisciplinary team of cardiologists, surgeons, and cardiac anesthetists using the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score and logistic EuroSCORE (LE), computed tomography angiography (CTA), 2D echocardiography and coronary angiography. Coronary artery revascularization was done when indicated. Echocardiography and clinical follow-up was done at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months; and then every year thereafter or whenever clinically indicated. TAVR was done at the cardiac catheterization laboratory with transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) guidance and mostly under general anesthesia. The femoral approach was used whenever possible. Those with unsuitable femoral anatomy underwent subclavian or direct aortic implantation. 

Results: A total of 51 patients underwent TAVR. Twenty-seven (53%) were males; mean age was 77.8 years. Forty-nine had severe, symptomatic, calcific AS; two had severe aortic regurgitation (AR). Forty-nine (96%) had congestive heart failure, 34 of which were in New York Heart Association (NYHA) classes III–IV. Two (4%) had recurrent syncope. Fifty-one (100%) had hypertension; 32 (63%) had chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder; and 40 (78%) had coronary artery disease. The mean STS and LE scores were 10.71 and 15.31, respectively. The mean left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was 55%; mean aortic valve area (AVA), 0.65 cm2; peak and mean gradients, 80.19 mmHg and 49.17 mmHg, respectively; and mean pulmonary artery pressure, 45.2 mmHg. Procedural success was 98%, with 30-day all-cause mortality of 8%. Mean hospital stay was 10.13 days. Twelve (23.5%) had permanent pacemaker implantation for high-grade atrioventricular block. Mean follow-up was 446.2 days. On follow-up, 5 (10%) had died of noncardiac causes, 1 (2%) of sudden cardiac death 16 months after implantation. Serial echocardiograms demonstrated no AR in 25 (51%); trivial to mild, 14 (29%); moderate to severe periventricular leucomalacia, 1(2%). Mean and peak follow-up gradients were 17.947 (p≤0.0001) and 9.417 mmHg (p≤0.0001), respectively; mean AVA, 1.84 cm2 (p≤0.0001); mean LVEF, 59.39% (p=0.003); mean pulmonary artery systolic pressure, 43.47 mmHg (p=0.599). Thirty-eight surviving patients remain in NYHA Class I, while 4 are Class II (p=0.002). 

Conclusion: TAVR in high-risk, extra-high-risk, or inoperable patients can be performed with high procedural success and acceptable 30-day mortality. Valve performance, valve gradients and AVA remain stable and significantly improve on follow-up. Most patients remain in functional Class I. Follow-up noncardiac mortality appears to be a function of multiple complex comorbidities among extra-high risk or inoperable patients.

References
  1. 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. 
  2. Leon MB, Smith CR, Mack M, et al. Transcatheter aortic-valve implantation for aortic stenosis in patients who cannot undergo surgery. N Eng J Med. 2010;363:1597–607. 
  3. Makkar RR, Fontana GP, Jilaihawi H, et al; PARTNER Trial Investigators. Transcatheter aortic-valve replacement for inoperable severe aortic stenosis. N Eng J Med. 2012;366:1696–704. 
  4. Grube E, Laborde JC, Gerckens U, et al. Percutaneous implantation of the CoreValve self-expanding valve prosthesis in high-risk patients with aortic valve disease: the Siegburg first-in-man study.Circulation. 2006;114:1616–24. 
  5. Nkomo VT, Gardin JM, Skelton TN, et al. Burden of valvular heart diseases: a population-based study. Lancet. 2006;368:1005–11.
  6. Rahimtoola SH. Perspective on valvular heart disease: an update. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1989;14:1–23. 
  7. Culliford AT, Galloway AC, Colvin SB, et al Aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis in persons aged 80 years and over Am J Cardiol 1991;67:1256–60 
  8. Kvidal P, Bergström R, Hörte LG, et al Observed and relative survival after aortic valve replacement J Am Coll Cardiol 2000;35:747–56
  9. Kvidal P, Bergström R, Malm T, et al. Long-term follow-up of morbidity and mortality after aortic valve replacement with a mechanical valve prosthesis. Eur Heart J. 2000;21:1099–111.
  10. Roques F, Nashef SA, Michel P; EuroSCORE study group. Risk factors for early mortality after valve surgery in Europe in the 1990s: lessons from the EuroSCORE pilot program. J Heart Valve Dis. 2001;10:572–7. 
  11. Logeais Y, Langanay T, Roussin R, et al. Surgery for aortic stenosis in elderly patients. A study of surgical risk and predictive factors. Circulation. 1994;90:2891–8. 
  12. Iung B, Baron G, Butchart EG, et al. A prospective survey of patients with valvular heart disease in Europe: The Euro Heart Survey on Valvular Heart Disease. Eur Heart J. 2003;24:1231–43. 
  13. Iung B, Cachier A, Baron G, et al. Decision-making in elderly patients with severe aortic stenosis: why are so many denied surgery? Eur Heart J. 2005:26:2714–20. 
  14. American College of Cardiology; American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to revise the 1998 guidelines for the management of patients with valvular heart disease); Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists, et al. ACC/AHA 2006 guidelines 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 (writing Committee to Revise the 1998 guidelines for the management of patients with valvular heart disease) developed in collaboration with the Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists endorsed by the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;48:e1–148. 
  15. Cribier A, Savin T, Berland J, et al. Percutaneous transluminal balloon valvuloplasty of adult aortic stenosis: report of 92 cases. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1987;9: 381–6. 
  16. McKay RG. The Mansfield Scientific Aortic Valvuloplasty Registry: overview of acute hemodynamic results and procedural complications. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1991;17:485–91. 
  17. Block PC, Palacios IF. Clinical and hemodynamic follow-up after percutaneous aortic valvuloplasty in the elderly. Am J Cardiol. 1988;62:760–3. 
  18. Otto CM, Mickel MC, Kennedy JW, et al. Three-year outcome after balloon aortic valvuloplasty. Insights into prognosis of valvular aortic stenosis. Circulation. 1994;89:642–50. 
  19. Kuntz RE, Tosteson AN, Berman AD, et al. Predictors of event free survival after balloon aortic valvuloplasty. N Engl J Med. 1991;325:17–23. 
  20. Cribier A, Eltchaninoff H, Bash A, et al. Percutaneous transcatheter implantation of an aortic valve prosthesis for calcific aortic stenosis: first human case description. Circulation. 2002;106:3006–8. 
  21. Grube E, Laborde JC, Zickmann B, et al. First report on a human percutaneous transluminal implantation of a self-expanding valve prosthesis for interventional treatment of aortic valve stenosis. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2005;66:465–9. 
  22. Moat NE, Ludman P, de Belder MA. Long-term outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation in high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis: the U.K. TAVI (United Kingdom Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation) Registry. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;58:2130–8.
License

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License, which permits use, share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format, adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material, as long as you give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use. You may not use the material for commercial purposes. If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original. You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/.