Systematic review and meta-analysis of valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients with failed bioprosthetic aortic valves

EuroIntervention. 2020 Sep 18;16(7):539-548. doi: 10.4244/EIJ-D-19-00928.

Abstract

Aims: The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the evidence regarding the rates of procedural success and the incidence of adverse outcomes following valve-in-valve (VIV) transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in patients with failed bioprosthetic aortic valves.

Methods and results: A systematic search of major electronic databases was conducted for studies relevant to patients with failed bioprosthetic aortic valves undergoing VIV-TAVR. The primary outcome was procedural success. A total of 5,553 patients from 24 studies were included. The mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score was 7.84±5.14. The procedural success rate was high (97%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 94-98%). At 30 days, all-cause mortality was 5% (95% CI: 3-6%), stroke 2% (95% CI: 1-2%), myocardial infarction 1% (95% CI: 1-2%), permanent pacemaker placement 6% (95% CI: 5-8%), and aortic regurgitation 7% (95% CI: 5-10%). At one year, the incidence of all-cause mortality was 12% (95% CI: 10-14%), stroke 3% (95% CI: 2-4%), myocardial infarction 1% (95% CI: 0-2%), and permanent pacemaker placement 7% (95% CI: 5-11%). At three years, the incidence of all-cause mortality was 29% (95% CI: 25-34%) and stroke 6% (95% CI: 5-9%).

Conclusions: VIV-TAVR appears to be associated with high procedural success rates and low adverse outcomes during the short-term and midterm follow-up period.

Publication types

  • Meta-Analysis
  • Systematic Review

MeSH terms

  • Aortic Valve / surgery
  • Aortic Valve Insufficiency / surgery*
  • Aortic Valve Stenosis / surgery*
  • Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation / adverse effects*
  • Heart Valve Prosthesis*
  • Humans
  • Risk Factors
  • Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement / adverse effects*
  • Treatment Outcome