Dear Label_Name,

Greetings! I hope you are well.

I am writing on behalf of an international publishing house, Science and Education Publishing, USA (http://www.sciepub.com).

Science and Education Publishing (SciEP) is a multidisciplinary open access publisher of Journals covering the fields of Science, Technology and Medicine. All SciEP publications are subject to high-quality peer review, editorial and production processes and are freely available online.

Welcome to the April, 2013 edition of SciEP newsletter, providing monthly summaries of articles on science & education related topics of interest to scientist and professionals. The mission of our journals is to provide an open access forum for publishing new findings on issues pertinent to scientific and academic field. We also invite you to submit original research papers, review articles, short reports, or case studies are considered for publication in our Multidisciplinary Journals.

American Journal of Public Health Research
DOI: 10.12691/ajphr-1-1-3

The Implementation of a Tele-Homecare System with Service Oriented Architecture and HL7 Message Transmission Standard
Ching-Sung Wang

American Journal of Medical and Biological Research
DOI: 10.12691/ajmbr-1-1-2

The Influence of Ethanol on Pyruvate Kinases Activity in Vivo, in Vitro, in Silico
Lelevich Sergey Vladimirovich, Khrustalev Vladislav Victorovich, Barkovsky Eugene Victorovich, Shedogubova Tatyana Aleksandrovna

American Journal of Medical Sciences and Medicine
DOI: 10.12691/ajmsm-1-1-1

Clinical and Histological Features in Wegener Granulomatosis
Li Cavoli Gioacchino, Passantino Rita, Bono Luisa, Tortorici Calogera, Ferrantelli Angelo, Giammarresi Carlo, Rotolo Ugo

American Journal of Infectious Diseases and Microbiology
DOI: 10.12691/ajidm-1-1-2

The Curse of Lymphatic Filariasis: Would the Continual Use of Diethylcarbamazine Eliminate this Scourge in Papua New Guinea?
Anne Lanham, Lillian Mwanri

We have released issues of some journals on February 2013.
American Journal of Public Health Research
American Journal of Medical Sciences and Medicine
American Journal of Medical and Biological Research
American Journal of Pharmacological Sciences
American Journal of Clinical Medicine Research
American Journal of Nursing Research
American Journal of Cancer Prevention
American Journal of Medicine Studies
American Journal of Infectious Diseases and Microbiology
American Journal of Cardiovascular Disease Research
American Journal of Biomedical Research
American Journal of Mechanical Engineering
American Journal of Microbiological Research
Journal of Preventive Medicine
American Journal of Food and Nutrition
American Journal of Hypertension Research
American Journal of Sports Science and Medicine
Journal of Cancer Research and Treatment
American Journal of Zoological Research
Journal of Biomedical Engineering and Technology
American Journal of Microbiological Research
Biomedical Science and Engineering

We are pleased to announce that submissions are now being accepted for peer review for all the journals across all our subject areas in SciEP.

Please submit your manuscript via our online submission system:
http://www.sciepub.com/author/signin

To unsubscribe from our mailing list, please click on the following link: unsubscribe

I am looking forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards,

David Rain
Email:join@sciepub.com
Science and Education Publishing (http://www.sciepub.com)

Updates in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Omar Elsaka*, Ashraf Hamada Abd Al-Razik, Dalia Hisham, Abdulsalam Mahmoud Algamal

Department of Cardiology, Faculty of Medicine, Mansoura Manchester Medical Program (MMMP), Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt

Abstract: Severe symptomatic aortic stenosis includes a poor diagnosis until recently; surgical aortic valve replacement has been the standard of care in adults with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis. Trans catheter aortic valve substitute (TAVR) become developed as an alternative to the surgical approach in this excessive-threat and inoperable populace. TAVR is a minimally invasive, catheter-primarily based method to replace the characteristic of the aortic valve. Indicated for patients at intermediate or greater risk for open heart surgery, TAVR may be an excellent option for certain patients because the prevalence of aortic stenosis and comorbidities may increase the risks associated with surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). The complete manner usually takes approximately 1-2 hours. At the beginning of the system, surgeons make a small incision in considered one of 3 locations, the groin, the neck, or an intercostal space. a skinny, flexible catheter with the coronary heart valve is guided via the incision into the artery and to the diseased valve. The TAVR heart valve is positioned inside the diseased or failing surgical valve; it begins working at once. The catheter is then removed and the incision closed.

Keywords: TAVR, SAVR, updates, transfemoral approach, transcatheter valve implantation

Received September 04, 2021; Revised October 09, 2021; Accepted October 18, 2021

Citation: Omar Elsaka, Ashraf Hamada Abd Al-Razik, Dalia Hisham, Abdulsalam Mahmoud Algamal, Updates in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement. American Journal of Medical Sciences and Medicine, 9 (4). 89-104. January 2021. doi:10.12691/ajmsm-9-4-1

1. History of TAVR

The development of TAVR has been a 20-year long inspiring and successful journey from idea to the real world. TAVR appears today as a leap forward technology, difficult the principles of clinical practice, permitting hundreds of sufferers with extreme AS to receive a lifestyles-saving powerful alternative treatment to SAVR. This will now not were possible without the wonderful and unmatched collaborative spirit among clinicians and engineers who have provided their know-how with the unique intention of making this process no longer just possible, but additionally safe and a success. We are not achieving the quilt of the story. The non-stop translational work promises further technological innovations that will soon make TAVR easier and more secure inside 10 years, it's miles likely that

TAVR turns into the default method for sufferers with symptomatic AS (Figure 1) [1].

2. Indications (Figure 2, Figure 3) (Table 1) [1]

Indications for aortic valve alternative (surgical or transcatheter) are as follows:

1) Intense excessive-gradient AS with signs (elegance I recommendation, stage B proof)

2) Asymptomatic sufferers with extreme AS and LVEF < 50 (class I advice, degree B proof)

3) Severe AS whilst present process different cardiac surgery (class I recommendation, stage B evidence)

4) Asymptomatic severe AS and occasional surgical threat (elegance IIa recommendation, level B evidence)

5) Symptomatic with low-drift/low-gradient excessive AS (magnificence IIa advice, degree B proof)

6) Slight AS and present process other cardiac surgical operation (elegance IIa advice, stage C proof)

TAVR is accepted for the following:

1) Low to prohibitive surgical danger patients with extreme AS

2) Valve-in-valve processes for failed previous bioprosthetic valves

3. Contraindications [4]

Contraindications to transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and exclusion criteria are as follows:

1) Evidence of acute myocardial infarction (MI) at 1 month (30 days) or much less earlier than the supposed treatment (defined as Q-wave MI, or non–Q-wave MI with general creatine kinase [CK] elevation of CK-MB [muscle/brain] two times the regular stage within the presence of MB elevation and/or troponin stage elevation [World Health Organization definition])

2) Aortic valve is a congenital unicusp or bicuspid valve

3) Mixed aortic valve disease (aortic stenosis and aortic regurgitation with important aortic regurgitation >three+)

4) Hemodynamic or respiration instability requiring inotropic help, mechanical ventilation, or mechanical coronary heart assistance within 30 days of the screening evaluation

5) Need for emergency surgical treatment for any purpose

6) Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy without or with obstruction

7) Excessive left ventricular (LV) dysfunction with an LV ejection fraction (LVEF) of much less than 20% extreme pulmonary high blood pressure and right ventricular (RV) dysfunction

8) Echocardiographic proof of intracardiac mass, thrombus, or flora

9) Acknowledged contraindication or allergic reaction to all anticoagulation regimens or an inability to go through anticoagulation for the examination technique

10)local aortic annulus smaller than 18 mm or large than 25 mm as measured with echocardiography

11)Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-confirmed stroke or temporary ischemic assault (TIA) within 6 months (180 days) of the system

12)Renal insufficiency (creatinine level >3 mg/dL) and or cease-level renal disorder requiring continual dialysis on the time of screening

13)Expected lifestyles expectancy of much less than three hundred and sixty-five days (365 days) due to noncardiac comorbid conditions extreme incapacitating dementia

14)Aortic or thoracic aneurysm, described as a maximal luminal diameter of 5 cm or extra, marked tortuosity (hyperacute bend), aortic arch atheroma (particularly if thick [>5 mm], sticking out, or ulcerated] or narrowing (particularly with calcification and surface irregularities) of the belly or thoracic aorta, excessive "unfolding" and tortuosity of the thoracic aorta

15)Severe mitral regurgitation.

Figure 1. Development of the balloon expandable valve: unmet clinical need [1]

Figure 2. Indications for aortic valve replacement [2] (AVR = aortic valve replacement)

Figure 3. Indications for aortic valve replacement in patients with aortic stenosis [2] (AS = aortic stenosis; AVA = aortic valve area; AVR = aortic valve replacement; DSE = dobutamine stress echocardiography; ETT = exercise treadmill test; LVEF = left ventricular ejection fraction; ΔPmean = mean pressure gradient; Vmax = maximum velocity)

Table 1. ACC/AHA Recommendations for Aortic Stenosis: Choice of Surgical or Transcatheter Interventions (3)

4. Periprocedural Care

4.1. Affected Person Education and Consent

For obtaining informed consent, it is critical to as it should be inform sufferers and their own family about the benefits and dangers of the manner so the patient is in the long run able to make a voluntary decision. A principal goal on this interplay is the change of applicable exact facts approximately treatment techniques added in terminology that is understood by means of the affected person and own family. it's miles critical to apprehend that threat tolerance and patient expectancies range across many patient populations. As a result, a thorough evaluation of customized chance/gain profile is vital for each affected person undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) [6].

4.2. Pre-Procedure Planning

Patients who are considered for TAVR should undergo the preprocedural workup below.

Echocardiography is used to confirm the severity of aortic stenosis. CT angiography of the aortic root is used to determine the most reliable image orientation for valve positioning [6].

Left and right cardiac catheterization is used to evaluate for concomitant coronary artery disease or pulmonary hypertension that can require remedy previous to TAVR. CT angiography of the thoracoabdominal and iliofemoral arteries is used to evaluate the diameter, tortuosity of the vessels, and calcifications and to plan for the get entry to web site [6].

4.3. Equipment (Figure 7)

The equipment required for TAVR depends on the specific approach to the procedure and the performing center protocols.

CoreValve

The cutting-edge, 1/3-generation 18F CoreValve device has 3 additives, as follows (Figure 4) [8]:

1) A self-expanding nitinol aid frame with cells configured in a diamond cell layout, which anchors a trileaflet porcine pericardial tissue valve

2) An 18F shipping catheter

3) A disposable loading device.

Edwards-SAPIEN valve

The Edwards SAPIEN valve is a trileaflet bio prosthesis manufactured from bovine pericardium mounted on a balloon-expandable stent. This machine is currently available in sizes: (1) a 23-mm valve with a stent top of 14.three mm and (2) a 26-mm valve with a stent height of 16.1 mm (Figure 5, Figure 6) [9].

The second one-technology tool, Edwards SAPIEN XT, is made of a cobalt-chromium alloy, which affords the same radial electricity with a discounted valve profile. This valve is presently commercially available in Europe and is accepted for the TF approach. it is beneath research for the TA technique. The gadget will be to be had in 21-mm and 29-mm sizes inside the future.

Retroflex balloon catheter

The retroflex balloon catheter is used for valvuloplasty of the stenotic local aortic valve previous to implantation of an Edwards SAPIEN trans catheter heart valve. The tool isn't always meant for postdilation of deployed trans catheter coronary heart valves [11].

Crimper

The crimper is utilized in preparing the Edwards SAPIEN transcatheter coronary heart valve for implantation. The supplied cylindrical gauge is used to confirm that the collapsed profile of the valve device will feasibly move thru the introducer sheath. A measuring ring is used to calibrate the balloon inflation to its desired length and to determine the quantity of saline/comparison aggregate in the syringe required for balloon inflation at the time of deployment [11].

Retroflex guiding catheter

This catheter has a deflectable tip that changes direction when activated via the rotation of an actuator incorporated within the handle. The catheter is then used to direct the valve transport device via the arterial gadget, across the aortic arch, and across the aortic valve, providing a much less stressful passage. The retroflex catheter assists in centering and helping the valve because it crosses the calcified and stenotic local valve [11].

The Novoflex catheter is a newer-technology catheter that lets in loading of the Edwards SAPIEN XT prosthesis onto the balloon while in the frame, lowering the sheath size dramatically [11].

Figure 4. Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement (TAVR). Medtronic CoreValve [8]

Figure 5. Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement (TAVR). Edwards SAPIEN valve generations [9]

Figure 6. Trans catheter Aortic Valve Replacement (TAVR). Sizes and heights of available Edwards SAPIEN valve systems

Figure 7. Equipment used for TAVR

Ascendra shipping system

This delivery catheter is used for the TA approach. The catheter allows for easy manipulation of the valve to improve orientation of the bioprosthesis [11].

Delivery sheath

This 25-cm–lengthy hydrophilic-covered sheath that is advanced into the belly aorta to lower vascular complications, because the bioprosthetic valve and the deflecting guide catheter are brought into the aorta. The sheaths are ready with a hemostatic mechanism to decrease blood loss. The TF delivery machine requires a 22F and 24F sheath for the 23-mm and 26- mm valves, respectively. See Table 3 [12].

The TA sheath is 26F, is shorter, and has a bendy tip to minimize trauma as it's miles introduced in to the left ventricle [12].

5. Patient Preparation

Anesthesia

Trans catheter aortic valve implantation may be done below aware sedation or wellknown anesthesia. popular anesthesia is desired if TEE echocardiography is carried out [14].

Positioning

The patient stays inside the supine function during the procedure [14].

Trying out and medicinal drugs

Patients are pretreated with aspirin (81-325 mg) daily and clopidogrel 300-mg loading dose at least one hour previous to the process and persevered at 81-mg oral daily dose. After the system, aspirin (at the least 81 mg every day) is continued indefinitely, and clopidogrel eighty one mg each day is sustained for 1-6 months [15].

Adjunctive antacids are to be considered

Routing laboratory tests previous to the manner include entire blood cellular (CBC) count number, global normalized ratio (INR), partial thromboplastic time (PTT), albumin and transaminase levels, renal characteristic checking out, and 12-lead electrocardiography (ECG). Cardiac biomarker stages (ie, CK and CK-MB) also are examined within forty eight hours of the manner [16].

To decrease the hazard of prosthetic valve infection, prophylactic intravenous antibiotic therapy at least 1 hour before the method is likewise endorsed. The authors use cefuroxime 750 mg IV 1 hour preprocedure, and the dose is repeated 6 and 12 hours after the system. In sufferers who're allergic to penicillin (or cephalosporins), vancomycin may be considered [16].

Monitoring & observe-up

The patient should be found with a transient pacemaker in a cardiovascular ICU for up to forty eight hours to monitor for any conduction gadget abnormalities. If no conduction gadget disturbances are detected, the patient is monitored for an additional seventy two hours after which discharged [16].

The affected person must continue taking aspirin 81-325 mg every day and clopidogrel 75 mg day by day for as a minimum three months following the procedure.

Both transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) and transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) can be used to guide the manner and examine for complications, as wished [17].

Continuous invasive hemodynamic monitoring must be used for the duration of the system [17].

Working Room

The process can be executed inside the cardiac catheterization laboratory or in a hybrid operating room. A set fluoroscopy unit is required. In addition to storing the reference images. Cardiopulmonary bypass equipment should be available easily in case of complications. The room must additionally be prepared with substances required to treat vascular and coronary complications [18].

Approach (Figure 8) (Table 2, Table 3)

Technique issues

The Edwards SAPIEN valve can be implanted via a TF or TA approach, and the Medtronic Core Valve device can be delivered via a femoral, subclavian, or direct aortic technique (direct aortic get admission to can be accomplished through both a ministernotomy or a minithoracotomy) [18].

Table 2. Access sites and approaches for TAVR [19]

Table 3.

Figure 8. Access sites and approaches for TAVR [20]

Vascular complications were related to tremendous mortality and may be averted through accurate screening. desk 2 summarizes the minimal vessel diameter required for extraordinary transcatheter aortic valve structures [18].

6. Types of Valves

There are currently 8 prosthetic transcatheter valve types which are available. Two of these are FDA-approved in the United States. The selection trial is a small observe which in comparison to the most prominent two valves (middle and SAPIEN) and no major significant differences were found in primary clinical endpoints between both valves. Though, there are situations, anatomical variability, and operator preferences that hold to make one valve greater finest to the alternative, depending on the scenario.There are currently three ongoing major trials comparing newer generation valves to the aforementioned devices (Table 4) [22].

7. Outcomes

Evaluation among surgical aortic valve replacement (savr) and trans catheter aortic valve substitute (tavr)

TAVR has been demonstrated to be more effective than the SAVR standard therapy in ineligible surgical candidates, as well as excessive-risk patients. There may be some additional evidence, restrained via the shortness of the follow-up, suggesting its non-inferiority in intermediate and occasional-chance patients [23]

Prefering TAVR over SAVR (Table 5, Table 6):

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) for treatment of severe symptomatic aortic stenosis (AS) has become an accepted and even preferred alternative to surgical valve replacement (SAVR) for inoperable and high-risk patients, and has recently gained Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for intermediate-risk patients. Current trials are evaluating the safety and feasibility of this technique in lower risk symptomatic patients and asymptomatic patients, or with moderate AS and heart failure [23]

The growth of TAVR from an experimental technique to a highly reproducible procedure that has proliferated rapidly has been dependent on numerous key advancements [24]:

1) Improved imaging with multi-detector computed tomography (CT),

2) Better device technology leading to easier implantation, and

3) Fewer major complications.

These advancements have resulted in:

1) More transfemoral (TF) access route implantation

2) Less paravalvular leak (PVL)

3) Fewer pacemakers (PPM)

4) Lower stroke rates (CVA)

5) Less bleeding.

Table 4. Eight prosthetic transcatheter valve types which are available [23]

Table 5. FEATURES OF TAVR VS SAVR PROTHESES [24]

Table 6. BENEFITS OF TRANSFEMORAL TAVR OVER SAVR; THE PATIENT PRESPECTIVE [24]

They conducted an overview of systematic reviews that included the two newest randomised trials on TAVI in low risk group published in May 2019. We included 15 systematic reviews (2 covering all risk groups, 11 the low risk group, and 2 the intermediate and low risk groups). Based on evidence from eight randomised trials, we conclude that TAVI compared with SAVR in patients with severe aortic stenosis across all surgical risk groups [24]:

1) probably improves all-cause mortality or disabling stroke up to two years

2) may slightly reduce major bleeding, new-onset fibrillation and acute kidney injury

3) probably increases transient ischemic attacks, major vascular complications, permanent pacemaker implantation, re-intervention and paravalvular leak

4) May make little or no difference for all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction and stroke at long-term follow-up.

Five-Year Outcomes of Transcatheter or Surgical Aortic-Valve Replacement

At 5 years, there was no significant difference in the incidence of death from any cause or disabling stroke between the TAVR group and the surgery group (47.9% and 43.4%, respectively; hazard ratio, 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.95 to 1.25; P=0.21). Results were similar for the transfemoral-access cohort (44.5% and 42.0%, respectively; hazard ratio, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.87 to 1.20), but the incidence of death or disabling stroke was higher after TAVR than after surgery in the transthoracic-access cohort (59.3% vs. 48.3%; hazard ratio, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.71). At 5 years, more patients in the TAVR group than in the surgery group had at least mild paravalvular aortic regurgitation (33.3% vs. 6.3%). Repeat hospitalizations were more frequent after TAVR than after surgery (33.3% vs. 25.2%), as were aortic-valve reinterventions (3.2% vs. 0.8%). Improvement in health status at 5 years was similar for TAVR and surgery [24].

8. Discussion

8.1. Edward Sapien Tavr Valves

The Edwards Sapien aortic valve is a balloon-expandable, trileaflet, equine pericardial valve attached to a stainless-steel framework. The Edwards Sapien XT and the Edwards Sapien 3 valves, available in 20-mm, 23-mm, 26-mm, and 29-mm sizes, are the 2 types of Edwards Sapien TAVR valves available in the U.S. Either can be deployed through transfemoral, transapical, transaxillary, and transaortic approaches. The Edwards Sapien XT system has been approved by the FDA for aortic valve-in-valve procedures. The Sapien 3 system—with a lower device profile, improved delivery catheter, and the additional feature of a polyethylene terephthalate outer skirt—has shown reduced rates of vascular sequelae and paravalvular regurgitation (Figure 9) [25].

Figure 9. Image shows the unique features of the Edwards Sapien 3 Valve

Partner trial outcomes

The position of Aortic Transcatheter Valve Trial Edwards SAPIEN Transcatheter coronary heart Valve (accomplice) trial was a randomized prospective trial that divided sufferers into 2 cohorts: accomplice A and partner B. The partner A cohort compared TAVR towards SAVR in high-surgical-threat sufferers, described as predicted chance of operative dying ≥15%.21 companion B included sufferers who were no longer taken into consideration suitable candidates for surgical operation due to blended danger of demise or irreversible comorbidity of greater than 50%, as agreed upon by way of 2 cardiac surgeons [27].

The associate an ordeal protected 351 sufferers undergoing SAVR and 348 undergoing TAVR. The 30-day mortality fee for TAVR become 3.4% and for SAVR was 6.5%. The 1-12 months mortality price became 24.2% and 26.8% for TAVR and SAVR, respectively (P=0.001 for noninferiority). reported five-12 months consequences were similar as well, with mortality prices mentioned at 67.8% inside the TAVR group versus 62.4% in the SAVR group (P=0.76) [27].

The companion B trial in comparison TAVR as opposed to scientific remedy, with the consequences appreciably favoring the TAVR institution. The 1-yr mortality price for TAVR was 30.7%, as opposed to 50.7% for conventional scientific therapy (P <0.001). The advantages of TAVR had been sustained at five years with a notably decrease mortality charge than scientific remedy (71.8% vs 93.6%; P <0.0001) [27].

Core valve system

The CoreValve Revolving machine, which has a self-increasing nitinol frame, consists of a trileaflet porcine pericardial tissue prosthesis and is introduced by using advancing a catheter over a guidewire in retrograde fashion from the femoral, axillary, or subclavian artery to the aortic annulus. The valve is manufactured in four diameters (23, 26, 29, and 31 mm) and turned into the first transcatheter valve authorized by the FDA for valve-in-valve substitute. Evolut™ R, the today's-generation CoreValve, is configured with a low delivery profile and is the handiest repositionable and recapturable tool available inside the U.S. (Figure 4, Figure 10) [28]

Figure 10. Images show the recapturability feature of the CoreValve Evolut R valve [28] (A) valve too deep; B) recapture begins; C) partially recaptured; D) valve fully recaptured)

Partner trial consequences

The CoreValve US Pivotal Trial become a multicenter noninferiority trial completed at forty five scientific sites within the U.S., which as compared TAVR using a CoreValve with SAVR, in patients who had intense AS and improved danger of loss of life from surgical procedure. The inclusion criteria were big apple heart association (NYHA) purposeful elegance II or greater, severe AS with aortic valve area ≤0.8 cm2 or aortic valve vicinity index ≤0.5 cm2/m2 and an average gradient >40 mmHg or a height speed >4 m/s whether at relaxation or in the course of dobutamine echocardiography, and at improved surgical danger. The primary endpoint become all-cause dying at twelve months, and 795 sufferers underwent randomization in the U.S. All-motive dying at three hundred and sixty five days within the TAVR group changed into 14.2% versus 19.1% within the SAVR institution (P <0.001 for noninferiority and P=0.04 for superiority). The 2-year mortality consequences had been congruent with the 1-year effects: an all-cause mortality charge at 22.2% within the TAVR group and 28.6% within the SAVR institution. Hemodynamic performance was advanced inside the TAVR group always [29].

There were promising results from the CoreValve Australia-New Zealand take a look at, the Italian CoreValve registry, and the United Kingdom TAVI registry [26,27,28]. The results from the Italian registry confirmed sturdiness with the Core Valve at the 5-year comply with-up, with most effective 5 sufferers (1.4 %) stated to have prosthesis failure [28]. The Spanish revel in yielded a 30-day mortality fee of seven 4% in 108 patients who underwent TAVI [29].

Corevalve vs Edwards sapien valve

The Randomized assessment of Transcatheter heart Valves in excessive danger sufferers with excessive Aortic Stenosis: Medtronic CoreValve versus Edwards Sapien XT (preference) trial (NCT01645202) changed into the first head-to-head trial of a balloon-expandable TAVR valve versus a self-expandable valve.30 At 30 days, tool fulfillment happened in 116 of 121 sufferers (ninety 5.9%) within the balloon-expandable institution and 93 of 120 sufferers (77.5%) inside the self-expandable group (P <0.001). This become attributed to an appreciably decrease frequency of aortic regurgitation and the uncommon want for implanting a couple of valve in the balloon-expandable institution. Notwithstanding the greater device achievement within the balloon-expandable group, the mortality charges in these corporations had been similar each on the 30-day and on the 1-yr follow-up. A current meta-analysis of these 2 agencies showed a similar hazard of loss of life and stroke at both stages.31 however, the occurrence of recent pacemaker implantation, aortic regurgitation, valve embolization, and the need for multiple valves changed into determined to be higher with self-expandable valve implantation than with balloon-expandable valve implantation [30].

4 registries—the United Kingdom TAVI registry, the Pooled-Rotterdam-Milano-Toulouse In Collaboration (Pragmatic Plus Initiative), the Spanish countrywide TAVI registry, and the Belgian TAVI Registry—stated comparable outcomes for the Edwards Sapien and the CoreValve [30].

Lotus system

November 17, 2020 — Boston medical Corp. announced nowadays it is straight away retiring the whole Lotus facet transcatheter aortic valve substitute (TAVR) machine. It also initiated an international, voluntary recall of all unused inventory of the Lotus aspect because of complexities related to the product transport gadget [31].

The corporation stated the bear in mind is associated totally to the delivery device, because the valve continues to achieve fine and clinically effective overall performance post-implant. Boston scientific stated there is no protection problem for patients who presently have an implanted Lotus facet valve [31].

Given the additional time and funding required to broaden and reintroduce a stronger transport machine, the business enterprise has chosen to discontinue the entire Lotus product platform as opposed to spending extra assets on a new shipping platform. All related industrial, clinical, research and improvement and manufacturing sports will also cease [31].

"while we have been thrilled with the benefits the Lotus aspect valve has furnished to sufferers, we have been increasingly more challenged with the aid of the intricacies of the shipping system required to allow physicians to completely reposition and recapture the valve," stated Mike Mahoney, chairman and chief govt officer, Boston clinical. "The complexity of the transport device, production challenges, the continuing need for further technical improvements, and contemporary market adoption fees led us to the tough choice to prevent investing inside the Lotus part platform. We will alternatively recognition our resources and efforts on our Acurate neo2 Aortic Valve system, Sentinel Cerebral Embolic protection device and other excessive boom areas across our portfolio." (Figure 11) [31].

Figure 11. Images for Lotus system [32]

Comparison between the three systems (short brief) (Table 7):

Table 7. Comparison between the three systems [33]

9. Complications

Structural valve deterioration/durability

There are many elements that could affect valve sturdiness. lack of valvular circularity may make contributions to undue stresses on leaflet tissue, in addition to irregular leaflet motion, which can also bring about reduced sturdiness. Terrible drift characteristics, because of an obstructive layout, may also affect EOA and gradient adversely, thereby impacting the longevity of the tissue. Design elements that produce factors of stasis could produce an elevated risk of thrombosis, ensuing in suboptimal medical consequences (Figure 12) [34].

Figure 12. Structural valve deterioration /durability [34]

Patient-prosthesis mismatch

“Patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM) happens whilst the effective orifice area (EOA) of a normally functioning prosthesis is just too small when it comes to the affected person’s frame length. to keep away from PPM, TAVR valve selection and their hemodynamics (EOA and suggest gradients) may be a critical consideration for patients and impact of pastime tiers (Figure 13) [35].

Figure 13. Patient-prosthesis mismatch [35]

AT/ET= acceleration time/ejection time ratio; EOA= estimated orifice area; DVI= Doppler velocity index; FU= follow up; BSA= body surface area; MDCT= multidetector computed tomography.

Stroke and neurologic injury

“Affected person-prosthesis mismatch (PPM) occurs at the same time as the powerful orifice place (EOA) of a generally functioning prosthesis is simply too small when it comes to the affected character’s frame duration. to avoid PPM, TAVR valve choice and their hemodynamics (EOA and recommend gradients) can be a crucial consideration for sufferers and the impact of hobby stages (Figure 14) [36].

Figure 14. Embolic protective system [36]

Aortic regurgitation

More recent generation valves with the addition for pericardial wraps or tissue skirt have visible enhancements in PVL, just like robotically-expandable valves (Figure 15) [37].

Figure 15. Paravalvular aortic regurgitation [37]

Figure 16. Valve thrombosis [37]

Valve thrombosis

Layout elements that produce factors of stasis could increase threat of thrombosis, ensuing in suboptimal scientific consequences. A supra-annular design decreases the probability of a neo-sinus — allowing good enough washing behind the native leaflets.[i] Intra- annularity can be a risk factor for thrombosis formation. The presence of reduced leaflet movement (RLM) is associated with expanded hazard of stroke or brief ischemic assault (TIA) (Figure 16) [37].

Conduction disturbances

Conduction disturbance remains key attention in all TAVR methods. there is a need for further proof round conduction disturbance, procedural efficiencies, operator revel in and the elements surrounding it. The want for an everlasting pacemaker is a regarded hazard of each transcatheter and surgical valve substitute (Figure 17) [38].

Whilst a few early technology TAVR devices were associated with a pacemaker rate of >20%, current commercially available gadgets report pacemaker prices of < 15% [38].

Figure 17. Postoperative conductive disturbances (LBBB) after TAVR [38]

Annular rupture

Annular rupture is an unprecedented difficulty of TAVR. Predisposing factors consist of small sinotubular junction or annular length, cumbersome and dense calcification, competitive BAV, and porcelain aorta. once annular rupture occurs, it's miles related to excessive mortality management consists of decisions for consolation care and sedation, tries at medical management with pericardial drainage and autotransfusion of smaller leaks, or emergent conversion to an open operation (Figure 18) [39].

Figure 18. Annular rupture after TAVR [39]

Post-TAVR coronary access

Put up-TAVR PCI management is an crucial consideration for the lifetime control of low hazard sufferers. According to the literature, the want to reaccess the coronaries is a totally rare occurrence and a system with a completely excessive success charge (Figure 19) [39].

Figure 19. Difficulty of coronary access after TAVR [39]

Valve embolization

Valve embolization generally takes place in a single or extra of the subsequent conditions (Figure 20) [40]:

1) Undersizing of the bioprosthesis

2) Malposition

3) irrelevant capture throughout rapid ventricular pacing

Figure 20. Valve movement (valve embolization) after TAVR [40]

Renal insufficiency

Acute renal failure after TAVR has an occurrence of 12%-28% and can progress to require dialysis in 1.4% of instances. The vital chance factors for development of renal failure consist of high blood pressure (OR = 4.66), transfusion requirement (OR = 3.47), and COPD (OR = 2.64). Acute renal failure is less not unusual in sufferers undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation than in those present process surgical aortic valve alternative (2.5% vs 8.7%) (Figure 21) [41].

Vascular complications

Vascular headaches consist of aortic or iliofemoral dissection, vascular perforation, vessel rupture or avulsion, bleeding requiring tremendous blood transfusions, or additional percutaneous or surgical interventions. Those are the maximum common detrimental consequences of TAVR and are specifically not unusual with the TF approach (Figure 22) [42].

Figure 21. Renal insufficiency after TAVR [41]

Figure 22. Vascular complications after TAVR [42]

Ventricular perforation

Ventricular perforation is an extraordinary problem of TF TAVR. Its management consists of pericardial drainage and autotransfusion or conversion to open closure (Figure 23) [43].

Figure 23. Ventricular perforation after TAVR [43]

10. Medication

Medication summary

The targets of pharmacotherapy are to put together the patient for the procedure, to prevent complications, and decrease morbidity [43].

Antiplatelet drugs

Clopidogrel selectively inhibits adenosine diphosphate (ADP) binding to platelet receptors and subsequent ADP-mediated activation of the glycoprotein (GP) IIb/IIIa complicated, thereby inhibiting platelet aggregation. Antiplatelet therapy with aspirin (162-325 mg) and clopidogrel (three hundred mg) is started at least 24 hours prior to transcatheter aortic valve implantation [43].

Aspirin: Patients are pretreated with aspirin (81-325 mg) every day and clopidogrel three hundred-mg loading dose at least one hour prior to the method and endured at 81-mg oral each day dose.

Antibiotics

1) Cefuroxime is a 2nd-era cephalosporin that keeps the gram-fine pastime of first-technology cephalosporins; it adds pastime towards Proteus mirabilis, Haemophilus influenzae, E coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae, and Moraxella catarrhalis. The dose is repeated 6 and 12 hours after the process. In sufferers who're allergic to penicillin (or cephalosporins), vancomycin may be considered [43].

2) Vancomycin is a robust antibiotic this is directed against gram negative organisms and is active in opposition to enterococcal species. Vancomycin is used at the side of for prophylaxis in penicillin-allergic patients. Dose adjustment can be essential in patients with renal impairment [43].

11. Summary and Conclusion

THREE (3) Top FDA-Approved Transcatheter Aortic Valves:

Evolut corevalve System

The Evolut system (pictured; picture courtesy of Medtronic) of transcatheter aortic valves builds upon the same old CoreValve generation. The Evolut R valve functions a supra-annular self-expanding Nitinol frame and a porcine pericardial tissue valve. The Evolut pro contains the capabilities of the Evolut R, but differs with the aid of providing a pericardial wrap around the out of doors of the body for superior sealing. The Evolut pro also has extended annulus variety. The EnVeo transport gadget used for the Evolut valves also offers the option of respectability (Figure 24) [44].

Figure 24. Evolut corevalve System [44]

The Edward SAPIEN System

The SAPIEN 3 transcatheter aortic valve turned into evaluated and showed efficacy inside the accomplice medical trial software, which represented “the largest, most rigorous comparative body of proof in the history of aortic valve substitute, with extra than 10,000 patients studied,” in step with the manufacturer (Edwards). It’s also accredited for valve-in-valve strategies. The valve makes use of a bovine pericardium tissue valve and a polyethylene terephthalate (puppy) outer skirt. related devices encompass the SAPIEN three ultra, which features a taller outer skirt height and textured puppy material, and the SAPIEN XT, also approved for valve-in-valve processes (Figure 25) [44].

Figure 25. The Edward SAPIEN System [44]

The Lotus System

As previously reported on DocWire news, the Lotus machine (Boston scientific) of transcatheter aortic valves welcomed an FDA popularity of its most current device, the Lotus aspect valve. The leader distinguishing thing for the Lotus valve is the capacity to reposition the device. Lotus edge was evaluated within the REPRISE III take a look at (Figure 26) [44].

Figure 26. The Lotus System [44]

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank DR ABDULSALAM MAHMOUD ALGAMAL the supervisor of this work for his efforts at some stage in the non-compulsory training. I would love additionally to thank the MMMP stuff for their help and allowing us to benefit such an experience.

References

[1]   | Webb JG, Altwegg L, Boone RH, et al. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation: impact on clinical and valve-related outcomes. Circulation. 2021(1). 119: 3009-16.
[2]   | Thomas M, Schymik G, Walther T, et al. Thirty-day results of the SAPIEN Aortic Bioprosthesis European Outcome (SOURCE) registry: a European registry of transcatheter aortic valve implantation using the Edwards SAPIEN valve. Circulation. 2019(2). 122: 62-9.

[3]  
Piazza N, Grube E, Gerckens U, et al. Procedural and 30-day outcomes following transcatheter aortic valve implantation using the third generation (18F) CoreValve revalving system: results from the multicentre, expanded evaluation registry 1-year following CE mark approval. EuroIntervention. 2017 (3). 4: 242-9.

[4]   | Tamburino C, Capodanno D, Ramondo A, et al. Incidence and predictors of early and late mortality after transcatheter aortic valve implantation in 663 patients with severe aortic stenosis. Circulation 2015 (4). 123:299-308.
[5]   | Eltchaninoff H, Prat A, Gilard M, et al. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation: early results of the FRANCE (French Aortic National CoreValve and Edwards) registry. Eur Heart J. 2018 (5). 32: 191-7.
[6]   | Zahn A, Gerckens U, Grube E, et al. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation: first results from a multicentre real-world registry. Eur Heart J. 2021(6). 32: 198-204.
[7]   | Leon MB, Smith CR, Mack M, et al, for the PARTNER Trial Investigators. Transcatheter aortic-valve implantation for aortic stenosis in patients who cannot undergo surgery. N Engl J Med. 2020(17) .21. 3631597-607.
[8]   | Smith CR, Leon MB, Mack MJ, et al. Transcatheter versus surgical aortic-valve replacement in high-risk patients. N Engl J Med. 2021(7). 364: 2187-98.
[9]   | Holmes DR Jr, Mack MJ, Kaul S, et al. 2012 ACCF/AATS/SCAI/STS expert consensus document on transcatheter aortic valve replacement. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019 27. 59(13): 1200-54.
[10]   | Roques F, Michel P, Goldstone AR, Nashef SA. The logistic EuroSCORE. Eur Heart J. 2017. 24(9): 882-3.
[11]   | Edelman JJ, Thourani VH. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement and surgical aortic valve replacement: Both excellent therapies. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2018.; 156 (6):2135-2137.
[12]   | Yu PJ, Mattia A, Cassiere HA, et al. Should high risk patients with concomitant severe aortic stenosis and mitral valve disease undergo double valve surgery in the TAVR era?. J Cardiothorac Surg. 2018 .29. 12 (1): 123.
[13]   | Leon MB, Piazza N, Nikolsky E, et al. Standardized endpoint definitions for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation clinical trials: a consensus report from the Valve Academic Research Consortium. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015 .18. 57(3): 253-69.
[14]   | Kodali SK, Williams MR, Smith CR, et al. Two-year outcomes after transcatheter or surgical aortic-valve replacement. N Engl J Med. 2017(6). 366: 1686-95.
[15]   | Makkar RR, Fontana GP, Jilaihawi H, et al. Transcatheter aortic-valve replacement for inoperable severe aortic stenosis. N Engl J Med. 2015(10). 366:1696-704.
[16]   | Aldalati O, Kaura A, Khan H, et al. Bioprosthetic structural valve deterioration: how do TAVR and SAVR prostheses compare?. Int J Cardiol. (10) 2018. 1. 268: 170-5.
[17]   | Danielsen SO, Moons P, Sandven I, et al. Thirty-day readmissions in surgical and transcatheter aortic valve replacement: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Cardiol(20). 2018 .1. 268: 85-91.
[18]   | Rodes-Cabau J, Dumont E, Boone RH, et al. Cerebral embolism following transcatheter aortic valve implantation: comparison of transfemoral and transapical approaches. J Am Coll Cardiol. (13) 2015. 57: 18-28.
[19]   | Kahlert P, Knipp SC, Schlamann M, et al. Silent and apparent cerebral ischemia after percutaneous transfemoral aortic valve implantation: a diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging study. Circulation. (14) 2016. 121: 870-878.
[20]   | Arnold M, Schulz-Heise S, Achenbach S, et al. Embolic cerebral insults after transapical aortic valve implantation detected by magnetic resonance imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv (15). 2014. 3: 1126-1132.
[21]   | Ghanem A, Muller A, Nahle CP, et al. Risk and fate of cerebral embolism after transfemoral aortic valve implantation: a prospective pilot study with diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol. (16) 2015. 55: 1427-1432.
[22]   | Berry C, Cartier R, Bonan R. Fatal ischemic stroke related to nonpermissive peripheral artery access for percutaneous aortic valve replacement. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. (17) 2021. 69(1): 56-63.
[23]   | Koos R, Mahnken AH, Aktug O, et al. Electrocardiographic and imaging predictors for permanent pacemaker requirement after transcatheter aortic valve implantation. J Heart Valve Dis.(18) 2014. 20: 83-90.
[24]   | Nuis RJ, Van Mieghem NM, Schultz CJ, et al. Timing and potential mechanisms of new conduction abnormalities during the implantation of the Medtronic CoreValve System in patients with aortic stenosis. Eur Heart J. (19)2021. 32: 2067-2074.
[25]   | Oestreich BA, Mbai M, Gurevich S,et al. Computed tomography (CT) assessment of the membranous septal anatomy prior to transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with the balloon-expandable SAPIEN 3 valve. Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2020. 27(23).
[26]   | Mangieri A, Lanzillo G, Bertoldi L, et al. Predictors of advanced conduction disturbances requiring a late (≥48 H) permanent pacemaker following transcatheter aortic valve replacement. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2021 .13. 11 (15):1519-26.
[27]   | Cribier A, Zajarias A, Eltchaninoff H, et al. Trans-catheter aortic valve interventions: from balloon aortic valvuloplasty to trans- catheter aortic valve implantation. Topol EJ, Teirstein PS, eds. Textbook of Interventional Cardiology. 6th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier; (40) 2017. 661-82.
[28]   | Kahlert P, Al-Rashid F, Weber M, et al. Vascular access site complications after percutaneous transfemoral aortic valve implantation. Herz. 2018. 34(5): 398-408.
[29]   | Hayashida K, Lefevre T, Chevalier B, et al. Transfemoral aortic valve implantation new criteria to predict vascular complications. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016. 4(8): 851-8.

[30]  
Spaziano M, Lefèvre T, Romano M, Eltchaninoff H, Leprince P, Motreff P, Iung B, Van Belle E, Koning R, Verhoye JP, Gilard M, Garot P, Hovasse T, Le Breton H, Chevalier B. Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in the Catheterization Laboratory Versus Hybrid Operating Room: Insights From the FRANCE TAVI Registry. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2020. 12; 11(21): 2195-2203.

[31]   | Makkar R. PARTNER 3 Low-Risk Computed Tomography (CT) Substudy: Subclinical Leaflet Thrombosis in Transcatheter and Surgical Bioprosthetic Valves. Presented at TCT 2019, San Francisco, CA, (7) 2019.
[32]   | Baim DS, ed. Grossman's Cardiac Catheterization, Angiography, and Intervention. 7th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; (19) 2012.
[33]   | Goldstein LB, Bushnell CD, Adams RJ, et al. Guidelines for the primary prevention of stroke: a guideline for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke. 2015. 42 (2): 517-84.
[34]   | Mihara H, Shibayama K, Jilaihawi H, et al. Assessment of post-procedural aortic regurgitation after TAVR: an intraprocedural TEE study. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2019. 8(9): 993-1003.
[35]   | Jensen HA, Condado JF, Devireddy C, et al. Minimalist transcatheter aortic valve replacement: The new standard for surgeons and cardiologists using transfemoral access. 2019.. 150(4): 833-40.
[36]   | Liebetrau C, Gaede L, Kim WK, et al. Early changes in N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide levels after transcatheter aortic valve replacement and its impact on long-term mortality. Int J Cardiol. 2021. 15. 265: 40-6(23).
[37]   | Schoen FJ. Cardiac valve prostheses: pathological and bioengineering considerations. J Card Surg. 2010. 2 (1): 65-108.
[38]   | Sun W, Li K, Sirois E. Simulated elliptical bioprosthetic valve deformation: implications for asymmetric transcatheter valve deployment. J Biomech. 2015 1. 43 (16): 3085-90.
[39]   | Borz B, Durand E, Tron C, et al. Expandable sheath for transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement: procedural outcomes and complications. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2019. 1. 83 (6): E227-32.
[40]   | Popma JJ, Deeb GM, Yakubov SJ, et al, for the Evolut Low Risk Trial Investigators. Transcatheter aortic-valve replacement with a self-expanding valve in low-risk patients. N Engl J Med. 2020. 2. 380 (18): 1706-15.
[41]   | Koehler T, Buege M, Schleiting H, Seyfarth M, Tiroch K, Vorpahl M. Changes of the esheath outer dimensions used for transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Biomed Res Int. (33) 2018. 2015:572681.
[42]   | Mack MJ, Leon MB, Thourani VH, et al, PARTNER 3 Investigators. Transcatheter aortic-valve replacement with a balloon- expandable valve in low-risk patients. N Engl J Med. 2020. 2. 380 (18): 1695-705.
[43]   | Gunning PS, Saikrishnan N, Yoganathan AP, McNamara LM. Total ellipse of the heart valve: the impact of eccentric stent distortion on the regional dynamic deformation of pericardial tissue leaflets of a transcatheter aortic valve replacement. J R Soc Interface. 2019. 6. 12 (43): 20150737.

[44]  
Chen S, Redfors B, Ben-Yehuda O, Crowley A, Greason KL, Alu MC, Finn MT, Vahl TP, Nazif T, Thourani VH, Suri RM, Svensson L, Webb JG, Kodali SK, Leon MB. Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Prior Cardiac Surgery in the Randomized PARTNER 2A Trial. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2020 12; 11(39): 2207-2216.