TY - JOUR
T1 - Transcatheter aortic valve replacement with different valve types in elliptic aortic annuli
AU - Maeno, Yoshio
AU - Abramowitz, Yigal
AU - Yoon, Sung Han
AU - Jilaihawi, Hasan
AU - Raul, Sharma
AU - Israr, Sharjeel
AU - Miyasaka, Masaki
AU - Kawamori, Hiroyuki
AU - Kazuno, Yoshio
AU - Rami, Tanya
AU - Takahashi, Nobuyuki
AU - Mangat, Geeteshwar
AU - Kashif, Mohammad
AU - Chakravarty, Tarun
AU - Nakamura, Mamoo
AU - Cheng, Wen
AU - Makkar, Raj R.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2017, Japanese Circulation Society. All rights reserved.
PY - 2017/1/1
Y1 - 2017/1/1
N2 - Background: The aim of this study was to determine the influence of an elliptic annulus on acute device success rates following self-expanding (SE) transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) vs. balloon-expandable (BE) TAVR. Methods and Results: Outcomes were assessed using Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 definitions. Aortic annulus ratio (AAR) was measured as short axis diameter/long axis diameter. Mean AAR was 0.81±0.06. Patients were therefore divided into 2 groups: AAR <0.82 and AAR ≥0.82. For circular annuli (AAR ≥0.82; 363 patients), high device success rates were achieved in both valve groups (SE valve, 90.5% vs. BE valve, 95.0%, P=0.14). Conversely, for AAR <0.82 (374 patients), SE valves had lower device success rates than BE valves (82.5% vs. 95.3%, P=0.002). For elliptic annuli, SE-TAVR was an independent predictor of unsuccessful device implantation (OR, 6.34, P<0.001). Nonetheless, increased oversizing of SE valves for elliptic annuli was associated with an exponential rise in device success (threshold ≥17.5%; area under the curve, 0.83) but not for BE-TAVR. Furthermore, optimally oversized SE valves and BE valves had a similarly high device success for elliptic annuli (SE valve, 96.2% vs. BE valve, 95.3%). Conclusions: For circular annuli, similarly high device success was achieved for the 2 valve types. Conversely, for elliptic annuli, SE valves had a lower device success than BE valves. Device success following optimal oversizing of SE valves, however, was similar to that for BE valves.
AB - Background: The aim of this study was to determine the influence of an elliptic annulus on acute device success rates following self-expanding (SE) transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) vs. balloon-expandable (BE) TAVR. Methods and Results: Outcomes were assessed using Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 definitions. Aortic annulus ratio (AAR) was measured as short axis diameter/long axis diameter. Mean AAR was 0.81±0.06. Patients were therefore divided into 2 groups: AAR <0.82 and AAR ≥0.82. For circular annuli (AAR ≥0.82; 363 patients), high device success rates were achieved in both valve groups (SE valve, 90.5% vs. BE valve, 95.0%, P=0.14). Conversely, for AAR <0.82 (374 patients), SE valves had lower device success rates than BE valves (82.5% vs. 95.3%, P=0.002). For elliptic annuli, SE-TAVR was an independent predictor of unsuccessful device implantation (OR, 6.34, P<0.001). Nonetheless, increased oversizing of SE valves for elliptic annuli was associated with an exponential rise in device success (threshold ≥17.5%; area under the curve, 0.83) but not for BE-TAVR. Furthermore, optimally oversized SE valves and BE valves had a similarly high device success for elliptic annuli (SE valve, 96.2% vs. BE valve, 95.3%). Conclusions: For circular annuli, similarly high device success was achieved for the 2 valve types. Conversely, for elliptic annuli, SE valves had a lower device success than BE valves. Device success following optimal oversizing of SE valves, however, was similar to that for BE valves.
KW - Device success
KW - Elliptic annulus
KW - Transcatheter aortic valve implantation
KW - Transcatheter aortic valve replacement
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85021412223&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1253/circj.CJ-16-1240
DO - 10.1253/circj.CJ-16-1240
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85021412223
SN - 1346-9843
VL - 81
SP - 1036
EP - 1042
JO - Circulation Journal
JF - Circulation Journal
IS - 7
ER -