Bashir Hanad, Mendez-Hirata Gustavo, Schmidt Christian W, Wong Alan, Muuse Janelle, Egnaczyk Gregory F, Kereiakes Dean J, Seshiah Puvi, Guddeti Raviteja R, El-Hangouche Nadia, Garcia Santiago
The Christ Hospital Heart and Vascular Institute and the Lindner Center for Research and Education, Cincinnati, Ohio.
J Soc Cardiovasc Angiogr Interv. 2025 May 2;4(7):103662. doi: 10.1016/j.jscai.2025.103662. eCollection 2025 Jul.
Aortic regurgitation (AR) is a common complication in patients with left ventricular assist devices (LVAD). However, there is paucity of data regarding the feasibility and safety of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in this population. Hence, we sought to describe the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with LVAD and AR who underwent treatment with TAVR at our institution.
We included all patients with a LVAD who developed clinically significant AR and received TAVR at The Christ Hospital in Cincinnati, Ohio. Baseline clinical and echocardiographic characteristics were collected, and outcomes were defined using Valve Academic Research Consortium 3 criteria.
A total of 7 patients with LVAD were included. The median time from LVAD implantation to TAVR was 3.67 years (IQR, 1.96-4.26 years). The mean age of the patients was 68.6 ± 13.7 years, and the average Society of Thoracic Surgeons score was 6.2 ± 5.2. All patients presented with moderate to severe AR and New York Heart Association functional class III or IV symptoms. All procedures were performed via transfemoral access, with a median procedure time of 149 minutes (IQR, 146-150 minutes). The transcatheter heart valves implanted included commercially available devices-Abbott Navitor (n = 2) and Medtronic Evolut (n = 3)-and dedicated investigational devices for AR-JenaValve Trilogy (n = 1) and J-Valve (n = 1). All patients were discharged alive with no or mild residual AR. There was 1 case of device embolization, which was treated with a second valve, and 1 valve migration treated with snaring and repositioning of the valve. Both complications occurred in patients treated with commercially available self-expanding valves.
TAVR for AR in selected patients with LVAD is a feasible therapeutic option that may improve outcomes. Larger studies are necessary to better define procedural risks, optimal patient selection, and the role of TAVR valves specifically designed for AR in this population.
主动脉瓣反流(AR)是左心室辅助装置(LVAD)患者的常见并发症。然而,关于经导管主动脉瓣置换术(TAVR)在该人群中的可行性和安全性的数据较少。因此,我们试图描述在我们机构接受TAVR治疗的LVAD合并AR患者的临床特征和结局。
我们纳入了所有在俄亥俄州辛辛那提市基督医院发生具有临床意义的AR并接受TAVR的LVAD患者。收集基线临床和超声心动图特征,并使用瓣膜学术研究联盟3标准定义结局。
共纳入7例LVAD患者。从LVAD植入到TAVR的中位时间为3.67年(四分位间距,1.96 - 4.26年)。患者的平均年龄为68.6±13.7岁,胸外科医师协会平均评分为6.2±5.2。所有患者均表现为中重度AR以及纽约心脏协会功能分级III或IV级症状。所有手术均通过经股动脉途径进行,中位手术时间为149分钟(四分位间距,146 - 150分钟)。植入的经导管心脏瓣膜包括市售装置——雅培Navitor(n = 2)和美敦力Evolut(n = 3)——以及用于AR的专用研究装置——耶拿瓣膜三部曲(n = 1)和J瓣膜(n = 1)。所有患者均存活出院,无或仅有轻度残余AR。有1例装置栓塞,通过植入第二个瓣膜进行治疗,1例瓣膜移位通过圈套和重新定位瓣膜进行治疗。这两种并发症均发生在接受市售自膨胀瓣膜治疗的患者中。
对于选定的LVAD合并AR患者,TAVR是一种可行的治疗选择,可能改善结局。需要进行更大规模的研究,以更好地确定手术风险、最佳患者选择以及专门为该人群设计的AR TAVR瓣膜的作用。