Impact of aortic annular size and valve type on haemodynamics and clinical outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation.
10.47102/annals-acadmedsg.2022167
- Author:
Samuel Ji Quan KOH
1
;
Jonathan YAP
;
Yilin JIANG
;
Julian Cheong Kiat TAY
;
Kevin Kien Hong QUAH
;
Nishanth THIAGARAJAN
;
Swee Yaw TAN
;
Mohammed Rizwan AMANULLAH
;
Soo Teik LIM
;
Zameer Abdul AZIZ
;
Sivaraj GOVINDASAMY
;
Victor Tar Toong CHAO
;
See Hooi EWE
;
Kay Woon HO
Author Information
1. Department of Cardiology, National Heart Centre Singapore, Singapore.
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- MeSH:
Humans;
Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement;
Heart Valve Prosthesis;
Aortic Valve Stenosis/surgery*;
Aortic Valve/surgery*;
Prosthesis Design;
Postoperative Complications/surgery*;
Treatment Outcome;
Hemodynamics
- From:Annals of the Academy of Medicine, Singapore
2022;51(10):605-618
- CountrySingapore
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
INTRODUCTION:Data on patients with small aortic annuli (SAA) undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) are limited. We aim to describe the impact of aortic annular size, particularly SAA and TAVI valve type on valve haemodynamics, durability and clinical outcomes.
METHOD:All patients in National Heart Centre Singapore who underwent transfemoral TAVI for severe symptomatic native aortic stenosis from July 2012 to December 2019 were included. Outcome measures include valve haemodynamics, prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM), structural valve degeneration (SVD) and mortality.
RESULTS:A total of 244 patients were included. The mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons score was 6.22±6.08, with 52.5% patients with small aortic annulus (<23mm), 33.2% patients with medium aortic annulus (23-26mm) and 14.3% patients with large aortic annulus (>26mm). There were more patients with self-expanding valve (SEV) (65.2%) versus balloon-expandable valve (BEV) (34.8%). There were no significant differences in indexed aortic valve area (iAVA), mean pressure gradient (MPG), PPM, SVD or mortality across all aortic annular sizes. However, specific to the SAA group, patients with SEV had larger iAVA (SEV 1.19±0.35cm2/m2 vs BEV 0.88±0.15cm2/m2, P<0.01) and lower MPG (SEV 9.25±4.88 mmHg vs BEV 14.17±4.75 mmHg, P<0.01) at 1 year, without differences in PPM or mortality. Aortic annular size, TAVI valve type and PPM did not predict overall mortality up to 7 years. There was no significant difference in SVD between aortic annular sizes up to 5 years.
CONCLUSION:Valve haemodynamics and durability were similar across the different aortic annular sizes. In the SAA group, SEV had better haemodynamics than BEV at 1 year, but no differences in PPM or mortality. There were no significant differences in mortality between aortic annular sizes, TAVI valve types or PPM.
