Dal Piaz Matheus Ramos, Pires Lucas Tachotti, Herrera Jonathan Cayo Urdiales, Labat André Luis Bezerra, Cividanes Felipe Reale, Spina Guilherme Sobreira, Palma José Honório, Tarasoutchi Flávio
Faculdade de Medicina, Instituto do Coração, Hospital das Clínicas HCFMUSP, Universidade de São Paulo, 05403-000 São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Eur Heart J Case Rep. 2023 Nov 23;7(12):ytad579. doi: 10.1093/ehjcr/ytad579. eCollection 2023 Dec.
Mitral valve diseases are a common medical condition, and surgery is the most used therapeutic approach. The need for less invasive interventions led to the development of transcatheter valve implantation in high-risk patients. However, the treatment to the dysfunctions of these prosthetic valves is still uncertain, and the yield and safety of repeated transcatheter valve implantations remain unclear.
A 69-year-old Caucasian woman with three previous mitral valve procedures performed due to rheumatic valve disease (currently with a biological prosthetic mitral valve) and a 76-year-old Latin woman with previous liver transplantation (due to metabolic-associated fatty liver disease) and biological mitral prosthesis due to mitral valve prolapse with severe regurgitation underwent mitral valve-in-valve (ViV) transcatheter implantation at the time of dysfunction of their surgical prostheses. Later, these patients developed prosthetic valve dysfunction and clinical worsening, requiring another invasive procedure. Due to maintained high-risk status and unfavourable clinical conditions for surgery, re-valve-in-valve (re-ViV) was performed.
Valve-in-valve transcatheter mitral valve implantation was approved in 2017, and, since then, it has been used in several countries, mainly in high-risk patients. Nevertheless, these prosthetic valves may complicate with stenosis or regurgitation, demanding reinterventions. Although there are favourable data for mitral ViV, re-ViV still lacks robust data to support its performance, with only case reports in the literature so far. It is possible that in high-risk patients, there is a greater benefit from re-ViV when compared with the surgical strategy. However, this hypothesis must be studied in future controlled trials.
二尖瓣疾病是一种常见的病症,手术是最常用的治疗方法。对侵入性较小干预措施的需求促使经导管瓣膜植入术在高危患者中得到发展。然而,这些人工瓣膜功能障碍的治疗方法仍不明确,重复经导管瓣膜植入术的疗效和安全性也尚不清楚。
一名69岁的白种女性因风湿性瓣膜病曾接受过三次二尖瓣手术(目前植入生物二尖瓣人工瓣膜),以及一名76岁的拉丁裔女性曾因代谢相关脂肪性肝病接受过肝移植,因二尖瓣脱垂伴严重反流植入生物二尖瓣人工瓣膜,在其手术人工瓣膜功能障碍时接受了二尖瓣瓣中瓣(ViV)经导管植入术。后来,这些患者出现人工瓣膜功能障碍且临床症状恶化,需要再次进行侵入性手术。由于患者仍处于高危状态且手术的临床条件不利,因此进行了再次瓣中瓣(re-ViV)手术。
二尖瓣瓣中瓣经导管植入术于2017年获得批准,自那时起已在多个国家使用,主要用于高危患者。然而,这些人工瓣膜可能会出现狭窄或反流等并发症,需要再次干预。尽管二尖瓣ViV有一些有利的数据,但re-ViV仍缺乏有力的数据支持其应用,目前文献中仅有病例报告。在高危患者中,与手术策略相比,re-ViV可能具有更大的益处。然而,这一假设必须在未来的对照试验中进行研究。