Clin Res Cardiol (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00392-022-02087-y

Outcome of TAVI-ViV in the Same Procedure as Compared to Primary Successful TAVI

I. Horn1, H. Omran2, S. Bleiziffer3, S. Scholtz4, K. Friedrichs4, C. Piper5, T. K. Rudolph2

1Herz- und Diabeteszentrum NRW, Bad Oeynhausen; 2Allgemeine und Interventionelle Kardiologie/Angiologie, Herz- und Diabeteszentrum NRW, Bad Oeynhausen; 3Klinik für Thorax- und Kardiovaskularchirurgie, Herz- und Diabeteszentrum NRW, Bad Oeynhausen; 4Klinik für Kardiologie, Herz- und Diabeteszentrum NRW, Bad Oeynhausen; 5Klinik für Allgemeine und Interventionelle Kardiologie/Angiologie, Herz- und Diabeteszentrum NRW, Bad Oeynhausen;

Objective: The aim of this study was to compare outcomes of patients with primarly failed trancatheter aortic valves procedures (ViV-TAVI) versus successful TAVIs (TAVI). TAVI failed due to dislocation of the valve or remaining high paravalvular leakage with the consecutive implantation of a second valve in the same procedure (ViV-TAVI). Methods: 4562 Patients undergoing TAVR were retrospectively included from February 2011 to March 2022. Propensity score matching was performed to adjust the baseline characteristics between the ViV -TAVI (n= 93) and the TAVI (n= 4469) group. 186 matched (93:93) patients were analyzed. Outcomes of interest were in-hospital mortality, stroke, acute kidney failure, need for permanent new pacemaker and duration of intervention. Results: There was no difference in the age between the ViV-TAVI patients (81.7 ± 5.8) and the TAVI patients (81.5 ± 6.6). ViV-TAVI group showed a higher Euroscore2 compared to the TAVI group (7.8 ± 8.7 vs. 6.2 ± 7.7). The duration of the intervention was significant longer for ViV-TAVI than in the TAVI group (106.2 ±45.1 vs. 68.6 ± 35.9, p < 0.001). Concerning the events of in hospital death (0.1±0.2 vs. 0.0 ± 0.1), acute kidney failure (0.1 ± 0.3 vs. 0.0 ±0.2), stroke (0.0 ± 0.0. vs. 0.0 ± 0.2) and new permanent pacemaker implantation (0.2 ± 0.4 vs. (0.1 ± 0.3) there were no significant differences in the ViV-TAVI and the TAVI group. Conclusion: The implantation of a second valve during the same procedure can be a feasible and safe alternative treatment option in patients with failed transcatheter aortic valve procedures.

https://dgk.org/kongress_programme/ht2022/aP705.html