Download PDF
Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2019; 67(04): 236-242
DOI: 10.1055/s-0037-1608750
Original Cardiovascular
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Latest Generation of Balloon-Expandable Valve, the Edwards Sapien 3 Valve: Less Paravalvular Regurgitation but Higher Transvalvular Pressure Gradients

Kaveh Eghbalzadeh
1   Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Heart Center, Universitätsklinikum Köln, Cologne, Germany
,
Elmar W. Kuhn
1   Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Heart Center, Universitätsklinikum Köln, Cologne, Germany
,
Anton Sabashnikov
1   Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Heart Center, Universitätsklinikum Köln, Cologne, Germany
,
Carolyn Weber
1   Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Heart Center, Universitätsklinikum Köln, Cologne, Germany
,
Parwis Baradaran Rahmanian
1   Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Heart Center, Universitätsklinikum Köln, Cologne, Germany
,
Florian Siedek
2   Department of Radiology, Universitätsklinikum Köln, Cologne, Germany
,
Victor Mauri
3   Department of Cardiology, Heart Center, Universitätsklinikum Köln, Cologne, Germany
,
Tanja Rudolph
3   Department of Cardiology, Heart Center, Universitätsklinikum Köln, Cologne, Germany
,
Stephan Baldus
3   Department of Cardiology, Heart Center, Universitätsklinikum Köln, Cologne, Germany
,
Navid Madershahian
1   Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Heart Center, Universitätsklinikum Köln, Cologne, Germany
,
Thorsten C. Wahlers
1   Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Heart Center, Universitätsklinikum Köln, Cologne, Germany
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

19 April 2017

11 October 2017

Publication Date:
24 November 2017 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints All articles of this category

Abstract

Background The latest generation of balloon-expandable valve, the Edwards Sapien 3 valve (S3V), was designed to reduce paravalvular regurgitation (PVR). We retrospectively compared S3V with Edwards Sapien XT valve (SXTV) with regard to postprocedural transvalvular pressure gradients (PGs).

Methods Analysis of 152 patients receiving SXTV and 125 patients receiving S3V between February 2009 and April 2015 was performed. Transvalvular PGs and the incidence and extent of aortic regurgitation (AR) were compared postprocedurally by echocardiography for each valve size.

Results Postprocedurally, mean PGs for the 23 mm valves were 10.9 ± 5.3 versus 13.9 ± 5.1 (p = 0.017), whereas maximum PGs were 19.9 ± 8.3 versus 26.1 ± 10.4 mm Hg (p = 0.005) in SXTV and S3V patients, respectively. For the 26 mm valves, gradients were also significantly higher in S3V patients (mean PG: 11.6 ± 4.9 vs. 9.2 ± 4.2 [p = 0.004]; maximum PG: 23.0 ± 10.1 vs. 17.2 ± 7.4 mm Hg [p < 0.001]). Analysis revealed no significant differences in postprocedural transvalvular PGs for 29 mm valves (mean PG of 9.3 ± 3.9 and 11.2 ± 4.3 mm Hg [p = ns] and maximum PG of 17.5 ± 7.2 vs. 20.9 ± 6.8 mm Hg [p = ns]) between SXTV and S3V groups, respectively. With respect to PVR, the incidence of AR was significantly lower in S3V group (p = 0.001).

Conclusion S3V shows lower incidence of PVR; however, it is associated with significantly higher postprocedural transvalvular PGs for 23 and 26 mm valve sizes. These data might contribute to the scientific discussion, especially with respect to prosthesis selection in individual patients with small annular dimension.

Keywords

aorta/aortic - echocardiography - heart - valve - transapical - percutaneous
 

  • References

  • 1 Andersen HR, Knudsen LL, Hasenkam JM. Transluminal implantation of artificial heart valves. Description of a new expandable aortic valve and initial results with implantation by catheter technique in closed chest pigs. Eur Heart J 1992; 13 (05) 704-708
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Cribier A, Eltchaninoff H, Bash A. , et al. Percutaneous transcatheter implantation of an aortic valve prosthesis for calcific aortic stenosis: first human case description. Circulation 2002; 106 (24) 3006-3008
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Adams DH, Popma JJ, Reardon MJ. Transcatheter aortic-valve replacement with a self-expanding prosthesis. N Engl J Med 2014; 371 (10) 967-968
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Kodali SK, Williams MR, Smith CR. , et al; PARTNER Trial Investigators. Two-year outcomes after transcatheter or surgical aortic-valve replacement. N Engl J Med 2012; 366 (18) 1686-1695
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Smith CR, Leon MB, Mack MJ. , et al; PARTNER Trial Investigators. Transcatheter versus surgical aortic-valve replacement in high-risk patients. N Engl J Med 2011; 364 (23) 2187-2198
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Lorusso R, Gelsomino S, Renzulli A. Sutureless aortic valve replacement: an alternative to transcatheter aortic valve implantation?. Curr Opin Cardiol 2013; 28 (02) 158-163
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Moat NE, Ludman P, de Belder MA. , et al. Long-term outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation in high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis: the U.K. TAVI (United Kingdom Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation) Registry. J Am Coll Cardiol 2011; 58 (20) 2130-2138
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Gilard M, Eltchaninoff H, Iung B. , et al; FRANCE 2 Investigators. Registry of transcatheter aortic-valve implantation in high-risk patients. N Engl J Med 2012; 366 (18) 1705-1715
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Gotzmann M, Korten M, Bojara W. , et al. Long-term outcome of patients with moderate and severe prosthetic aortic valve regurgitation after transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Am J Cardiol 2012; 110 (10) 1500-1506
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Abdel-Wahab M, Zahn R, Horack M. , et al; German transcatheter aortic valve interventions registry investigators. Aortic regurgitation after transcatheter aortic valve implantation: incidence and early outcome. Results from the German transcatheter aortic valve interventions registry. Heart 2011; 97 (11) 899-906
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Zahn R, Gerckens U, Linke A. , et al; German Transcatheter Aortic Valve Interventions-Registry Investigators. Predictors of one-year mortality after transcatheter aortic valve implantation for severe symptomatic aortic stenosis. Am J Cardiol 2013; 112 (02) 272-279
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Athappan G, Patvardhan E, Tuzcu EM. , et al. Incidence, predictors, and outcomes of aortic regurgitation after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: meta-analysis and systematic review of literature. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013; 61 (15) 1585-1595
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Binder RK, Rodés-Cabau J, Wood DA. , et al. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement with the SAPIEN 3: a new balloon-expandable transcatheter heart valve. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2013; 6 (03) 293-300
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Kappetein AP, Head SJ, Généreux P. , et al. Updated standardized endpoint definitions for transcatheter aortic valve implantation: the Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 consensus document. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012; 60 (15) 1438-1454
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Leon MB, Smith CR, Mack M. , et al; PARTNER Trial Investigators. Transcatheter aortic-valve implantation for aortic stenosis in patients who cannot undergo surgery. N Engl J Med 2010; 363 (17) 1597-1607
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Pibarot P, Hahn RT, Weissman NJ, Monaghan MJ. Assessment of paravalvular regurgitation following TAVR: a proposal of unifying grading scheme. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2015; 8 (03) 340-360
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Une D, Mesana L, Chan V. , et al. Clinical impact of changes in left ventricular function after aortic valve replacement: analysis from 3112 patients. Circulation 2015; 132 (08) 741-747
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Hahn RT, Pibarot P, Stewart WJ. , et al. Comparison of transcatheter and surgical aortic valve replacement in severe aortic stenosis: a longitudinal study of echocardiography parameters in cohort A of the PARTNER trial (placement of aortic transcatheter valves). J Am Coll Cardiol 2013; 61 (25) 2514-2521
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Chacko SJ, Ansari AH, McCarthy PM. , et al. Prosthesis-patient mismatch in bovine pericardial aortic valves: evaluation using 3 different modalities and associated medium-term outcomes. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2013; 6 (05) 776-783
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Faerber G, Schleger S, Diab M. , et al. Valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation: the new playground for prosthesis-patient mismatch. J Interv Cardiol 2014; 27 (03) 287-292
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Yang TH, Webb JG, Blanke P. , et al. Incidence and severity of paravalvular aortic regurgitation with multidetector computed tomography nominal area oversizing or undersizing after transcatheter heart valve replacement with the Sapien 3: a comparison with the Sapien XT. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2015; 8 (03) 462-471
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Bocksch W, Grossmann B, Geisler T. , et al. Clinical outcome and paravalvular leakage of the new balloon-expandable Edwards Sapien 3 valve in comparison to its predecessor model (Edwards Sapien XT) in patients undergoing transfemoral aortic valve replacement. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2016; 88 (03) 466-475
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Murray MI, Geis N, Pleger ST. , et al. First experience with the new generation Edwards Sapien 3 aortic bioprosthesis: procedural results and short term outcome. J Interv Cardiol 2015; 28 (01) 109-116
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Webb J, Gerosa G, Lefèvre T. , et al. Multicenter evaluation of a next-generation balloon-expandable transcatheter aortic valve. J Am Coll Cardiol 2014; 64 (21) 2235-2243
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Mauri V, Reimann A, Stern D. , et al. Predictors of permanent pacemaker implantation after transcatheter aortic valve replacement with the SAPIEN 3. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2016; 9 (21) 2200-2209
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar