重做经导管主动脉瓣置换术(TAVR)的现状及局限性:为什么TAVR外植体作为瓣膜再介入策略是重要的。

IF 3.1 2区 医学 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Annals of cardiothoracic surgery Pub Date : 2025-03-31 Epub Date: 2025-03-04 DOI:10.21037/acs-2024-etavr-0149
Grace S Lee, Gilbert Tang, Syed Zaid, Derrick Y Tam
{"title":"重做经导管主动脉瓣置换术(TAVR)的现状及局限性:为什么TAVR外植体作为瓣膜再介入策略是重要的。","authors":"Grace S Lee, Gilbert Tang, Syed Zaid, Derrick Y Tam","doi":"10.21037/acs-2024-etavr-0149","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The rise of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) over the past two decades has substantially changed the lifetime management of patients with aortic valve disease. As the indications for TAVR expand to include younger and lower-risk patients, the proportion of patients who subsequently require reintervention for failed transcatheter heart valves (THVs) will increase. The two primary options for reintervention are redo TAVR and TAVR explant followed by surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). The indications for redo TAVR in the short term include emergency \"bailout\" procedures due to malpositioning, embolization, or long-term device failure due to paravalvular leak (PVL) or valvular degeneration. However, redo TAVR is not suitable for all patients. Those with prohibitive coronary anatomy, multivalvular involvement, severe patient-prosthetic mismatch, or endocarditis should be referred for TAVR explant, which is a comparatively higher-risk procedure. Redo TAVR has generally been associated with low mortality and complication rates, with key procedural considerations being valve selection [e.g., sizing, balloon-expandable valve (BEV) <i>vs.</i> self-expandable valve (SEV)], access, and coronary protection. TAVR explant poses numerous technical challenges, including concomitant ascending aorta or aortic root replacement, mitral valve involvement, or adhesions to the coronary ostia. Compared to redo TAVR, TAVR explant is associated with higher rates of short-term mortality and periprocedural complications. The 30-day mortality rates of TAVR explant approach 20%, and 1-year mortality rates range from 20% to 30%, with significantly greater risk associated with concomitant procedures. The data on both redo TAVR and TAVR explant are limited to observational cohorts without long-term follow-up. Given that patient populations and indications for redo TAVR and TAVR explant are vastly different, direct comparisons of outcomes between these two groups should be avoided. Nonetheless, multidisciplinary Heart Team collaboration remains imperative to advancing our knowledge of redo TAVR or TAVR explant procedures and the careful lifetime management of patients with aortic valve disease.</p>","PeriodicalId":8067,"journal":{"name":"Annals of cardiothoracic surgery","volume":"14 2","pages":"98-111"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12013764/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The current state of redo transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and limitations: why TAVR explant is important as the valve reintervention strategy.\",\"authors\":\"Grace S Lee, Gilbert Tang, Syed Zaid, Derrick Y Tam\",\"doi\":\"10.21037/acs-2024-etavr-0149\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The rise of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) over the past two decades has substantially changed the lifetime management of patients with aortic valve disease. As the indications for TAVR expand to include younger and lower-risk patients, the proportion of patients who subsequently require reintervention for failed transcatheter heart valves (THVs) will increase. The two primary options for reintervention are redo TAVR and TAVR explant followed by surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). The indications for redo TAVR in the short term include emergency \\\"bailout\\\" procedures due to malpositioning, embolization, or long-term device failure due to paravalvular leak (PVL) or valvular degeneration. However, redo TAVR is not suitable for all patients. Those with prohibitive coronary anatomy, multivalvular involvement, severe patient-prosthetic mismatch, or endocarditis should be referred for TAVR explant, which is a comparatively higher-risk procedure. Redo TAVR has generally been associated with low mortality and complication rates, with key procedural considerations being valve selection [e.g., sizing, balloon-expandable valve (BEV) <i>vs.</i> self-expandable valve (SEV)], access, and coronary protection. TAVR explant poses numerous technical challenges, including concomitant ascending aorta or aortic root replacement, mitral valve involvement, or adhesions to the coronary ostia. Compared to redo TAVR, TAVR explant is associated with higher rates of short-term mortality and periprocedural complications. The 30-day mortality rates of TAVR explant approach 20%, and 1-year mortality rates range from 20% to 30%, with significantly greater risk associated with concomitant procedures. The data on both redo TAVR and TAVR explant are limited to observational cohorts without long-term follow-up. Given that patient populations and indications for redo TAVR and TAVR explant are vastly different, direct comparisons of outcomes between these two groups should be avoided. Nonetheless, multidisciplinary Heart Team collaboration remains imperative to advancing our knowledge of redo TAVR or TAVR explant procedures and the careful lifetime management of patients with aortic valve disease.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8067,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of cardiothoracic surgery\",\"volume\":\"14 2\",\"pages\":\"98-111\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12013764/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of cardiothoracic surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21037/acs-2024-etavr-0149\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/3/4 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of cardiothoracic surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21037/acs-2024-etavr-0149","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在过去的二十年中,经导管主动脉瓣置换术(TAVR)的兴起极大地改变了主动脉瓣疾病患者的终生管理。随着TAVR适应症扩大到包括年轻和低风险患者,随后因经导管心脏瓣膜(thv)失效而需要再干预的患者比例将增加。再干预的两个主要选择是重做TAVR和TAVR外植体然后手术主动脉瓣置换术(SAVR)。短期内重做TAVR的适应症包括由于定位错误、栓塞或由于瓣旁泄漏(PVL)或瓣膜退变导致的长期装置故障而进行紧急“救出”手术。然而,重做TAVR并不适用于所有患者。冠状动脉解剖禁忌性、多瓣受累、严重患者-假体不匹配或心内膜炎患者应考虑TAVR移植,这是一种相对较高的手术风险。重做TAVR通常与低死亡率和并发症发生率相关,关键的手术考虑是瓣膜的选择[例如,大小、球囊可膨胀瓣膜(BEV)与自膨胀瓣膜(SEV)]、通路和冠状动脉保护。TAVR外植体面临许多技术挑战,包括伴随升主动脉或主动脉根置换、二尖瓣受累或冠状动脉口粘连。与重做TAVR相比,TAVR外植体具有更高的短期死亡率和术中并发症。TAVR外植体的30天死亡率接近20%,1年死亡率在20%至30%之间,伴随手术的风险显著增加。重做TAVR和TAVR外植体的数据仅限于没有长期随访的观察性队列。鉴于重做TAVR和TAVR外植体的患者群体和适应症有很大不同,应避免直接比较两组之间的结果。尽管如此,多学科的心脏团队合作仍然是必要的,以提高我们对重做TAVR或TAVR移植手术的认识,并对主动脉瓣疾病患者进行仔细的终身管理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The current state of redo transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and limitations: why TAVR explant is important as the valve reintervention strategy.

The rise of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) over the past two decades has substantially changed the lifetime management of patients with aortic valve disease. As the indications for TAVR expand to include younger and lower-risk patients, the proportion of patients who subsequently require reintervention for failed transcatheter heart valves (THVs) will increase. The two primary options for reintervention are redo TAVR and TAVR explant followed by surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). The indications for redo TAVR in the short term include emergency "bailout" procedures due to malpositioning, embolization, or long-term device failure due to paravalvular leak (PVL) or valvular degeneration. However, redo TAVR is not suitable for all patients. Those with prohibitive coronary anatomy, multivalvular involvement, severe patient-prosthetic mismatch, or endocarditis should be referred for TAVR explant, which is a comparatively higher-risk procedure. Redo TAVR has generally been associated with low mortality and complication rates, with key procedural considerations being valve selection [e.g., sizing, balloon-expandable valve (BEV) vs. self-expandable valve (SEV)], access, and coronary protection. TAVR explant poses numerous technical challenges, including concomitant ascending aorta or aortic root replacement, mitral valve involvement, or adhesions to the coronary ostia. Compared to redo TAVR, TAVR explant is associated with higher rates of short-term mortality and periprocedural complications. The 30-day mortality rates of TAVR explant approach 20%, and 1-year mortality rates range from 20% to 30%, with significantly greater risk associated with concomitant procedures. The data on both redo TAVR and TAVR explant are limited to observational cohorts without long-term follow-up. Given that patient populations and indications for redo TAVR and TAVR explant are vastly different, direct comparisons of outcomes between these two groups should be avoided. Nonetheless, multidisciplinary Heart Team collaboration remains imperative to advancing our knowledge of redo TAVR or TAVR explant procedures and the careful lifetime management of patients with aortic valve disease.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
58
期刊介绍: Information not localized
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信