{"title":"经导管主动脉瓣置换术后的临床结果、血流动力学和小叶血栓形成。","authors":"Juri Iwata, Kentaro Hayashida, Akiyoshi Kajino, Shingo Sakata, Shohei Imaeda, Toshinobu Ryuzaki, Hikaru Tsuruta, Hideyuki Shimizu, Masaki Ieda","doi":"10.1002/hsr2.70097","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>The indication of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is becoming more prevalent among younger and lower-risk patients. However, data on the latest intra-annular TAVR devices are limited. This study aims to compare the short-term clinical outcomes of two intra-annular transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) devices in Japan: SAPIEN 3 Ultra RESILIA (S3UR) and Navitor.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Of the 286 patients who underwent TAVR between May 2022 and October 2023 at our center, we enrolled 97 consecutive patients who received either S3UR or Navitor. We compared the intraprocedural invasive and echocardiographic hemodynamic assessment and post-procedural multidetector computed tomography (MDCT).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>The basic characteristics of the 97 patients (median age, 86 years [interquartile range, 81–89 years]) were similar. Technical success, defined by the Valve Academic Research Consortium, was achieved in all cases. Despite a smaller annulus, Navitor demonstrated decreased mean pressure gradient by TTE, 9.2 [7.3–13.6] mmHg versus 7.5 [5.9–9.5] mmHg, <i>p</i> = 0.006; but not by invasive measurement 5.1 [3.4–7.7] mmHg versus 5.3 [3.2–7.9] mmHg, <i>p</i> = 0.986). Discordance between echocardiographic and invasive assessment was more prominent with S3UR. However, severe prosthesis-patient mismatch was similarly noted between the two devices. Mild paravalvular leak (PVL) (24.5% vs. 54.5%, <i>p</i> = 0.002) was more frequent with the Navitor, despite no moderate-severe PVL in each group. The incidence of hypoattenuated leaflet thickening (HALT) detected by MDCT was similar between the two groups.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Both intra-annular valves demonstrated excellent hemodynamic performance with minimal PVL after TAVR. The incidence of HALT in both devices was comparable.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":36518,"journal":{"name":"Health Science Reports","volume":"8 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11782194/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clinical outcomes, hemodynamics, and leaflet thrombosis following transcatheter aortic valve replacement with novel intra-annular devices\",\"authors\":\"Juri Iwata, Kentaro Hayashida, Akiyoshi Kajino, Shingo Sakata, Shohei Imaeda, Toshinobu Ryuzaki, Hikaru Tsuruta, Hideyuki Shimizu, Masaki Ieda\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/hsr2.70097\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>The indication of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is becoming more prevalent among younger and lower-risk patients. However, data on the latest intra-annular TAVR devices are limited. This study aims to compare the short-term clinical outcomes of two intra-annular transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) devices in Japan: SAPIEN 3 Ultra RESILIA (S3UR) and Navitor.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>Of the 286 patients who underwent TAVR between May 2022 and October 2023 at our center, we enrolled 97 consecutive patients who received either S3UR or Navitor. We compared the intraprocedural invasive and echocardiographic hemodynamic assessment and post-procedural multidetector computed tomography (MDCT).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>The basic characteristics of the 97 patients (median age, 86 years [interquartile range, 81–89 years]) were similar. Technical success, defined by the Valve Academic Research Consortium, was achieved in all cases. Despite a smaller annulus, Navitor demonstrated decreased mean pressure gradient by TTE, 9.2 [7.3–13.6] mmHg versus 7.5 [5.9–9.5] mmHg, <i>p</i> = 0.006; but not by invasive measurement 5.1 [3.4–7.7] mmHg versus 5.3 [3.2–7.9] mmHg, <i>p</i> = 0.986). Discordance between echocardiographic and invasive assessment was more prominent with S3UR. However, severe prosthesis-patient mismatch was similarly noted between the two devices. Mild paravalvular leak (PVL) (24.5% vs. 54.5%, <i>p</i> = 0.002) was more frequent with the Navitor, despite no moderate-severe PVL in each group. The incidence of hypoattenuated leaflet thickening (HALT) detected by MDCT was similar between the two groups.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>Both intra-annular valves demonstrated excellent hemodynamic performance with minimal PVL after TAVR. The incidence of HALT in both devices was comparable.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36518,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Science Reports\",\"volume\":\"8 2\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11782194/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Science Reports\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hsr2.70097\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Science Reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hsr2.70097","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:经导管主动脉瓣置换术(TAVR)的适应症在年轻和低危患者中越来越普遍。然而,关于最新环内TAVR装置的数据有限。本研究旨在比较日本两种经导管环形主动脉瓣置换术(TAVR)装置的短期临床结果:SAPIEN 3 Ultra RESILIA (S3UR)和Navitor。方法:在我们中心2022年5月至2023年10月期间接受TAVR治疗的286例患者中,我们招募了97例连续接受S3UR或Navitor治疗的患者。我们比较了术中有创和超声心动图血流动力学评估和术后多探测器计算机断层扫描(MDCT)。结果:97例患者(中位年龄86岁[四分位数间距81 ~ 89岁])的基本特征相似。按照Valve学术研究联盟的定义,所有案例都取得了技术上的成功。尽管环空较小,但Navitor通过TTE显示平均压力梯度降低,为9.2 [7.3-13.6]mmHg vs . 7.5 [5.9-9.5] mmHg, p = 0.006;而非侵入性测量5.1 [3.4-7.7]mmHg和5.3 [3.2-7.9]mmHg, p = 0.986)。超声心动图与有创评估的不一致在S3UR中更为突出。然而,在两种装置之间也同样注意到严重的假体-患者不匹配。轻度瓣旁漏(PVL) (24.5% vs. 54.5%, p = 0.002)在Navitor组更常见,尽管两组均无中重度PVL。两组间MDCT检测小叶减薄增厚(HALT)的发生率相似。结论:两个环内瓣膜在TAVR后表现出良好的血流动力学性能,PVL最小。两种装置的HALT发生率具有可比性。
Clinical outcomes, hemodynamics, and leaflet thrombosis following transcatheter aortic valve replacement with novel intra-annular devices
Background
The indication of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is becoming more prevalent among younger and lower-risk patients. However, data on the latest intra-annular TAVR devices are limited. This study aims to compare the short-term clinical outcomes of two intra-annular transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) devices in Japan: SAPIEN 3 Ultra RESILIA (S3UR) and Navitor.
Methods
Of the 286 patients who underwent TAVR between May 2022 and October 2023 at our center, we enrolled 97 consecutive patients who received either S3UR or Navitor. We compared the intraprocedural invasive and echocardiographic hemodynamic assessment and post-procedural multidetector computed tomography (MDCT).
Results
The basic characteristics of the 97 patients (median age, 86 years [interquartile range, 81–89 years]) were similar. Technical success, defined by the Valve Academic Research Consortium, was achieved in all cases. Despite a smaller annulus, Navitor demonstrated decreased mean pressure gradient by TTE, 9.2 [7.3–13.6] mmHg versus 7.5 [5.9–9.5] mmHg, p = 0.006; but not by invasive measurement 5.1 [3.4–7.7] mmHg versus 5.3 [3.2–7.9] mmHg, p = 0.986). Discordance between echocardiographic and invasive assessment was more prominent with S3UR. However, severe prosthesis-patient mismatch was similarly noted between the two devices. Mild paravalvular leak (PVL) (24.5% vs. 54.5%, p = 0.002) was more frequent with the Navitor, despite no moderate-severe PVL in each group. The incidence of hypoattenuated leaflet thickening (HALT) detected by MDCT was similar between the two groups.
Conclusions
Both intra-annular valves demonstrated excellent hemodynamic performance with minimal PVL after TAVR. The incidence of HALT in both devices was comparable.