Logo image
Back
Outcomes following transcatheter transseptal versus transapical mitral valve-in-valve and valve-in-ring procedures
Journal article   Open access   Peer reviewed

Outcomes following transcatheter transseptal versus transapical mitral valve-in-valve and valve-in-ring procedures

Salik Nazir, Saroj Lohani, Niranjan Tachamo, Muhammad Sohail Khan, Bidhya Timilsina, Faraz Khan Luni and Anthony Donato
Journal of cardiovascular and thoracic research, v 10(4), pp 182-186
01 Jan 2018
DOI: https://doi.org/10.15171/jcvtr.2018.31
PMID: 30680074
Featured in Collection :   UN Sustainable Development Goals @ Drexel
url
https://doi.org/10.15171/jcvtr.2018.31View
Published, Version of Record (VoR) Open

Abstract

Original
Introduction: Transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve (ViV) & valve-in-ring (ViR) are relatively novel therapeutic alternatives for patients with degenerated bioprostheses or failed annuloplasty rings whose reoperative risk is too high. The predominant procedural access for both procedures is transapical or transseptal. However, whether there are differences in outcomes of this procedure using transseptal versus transapical access has not yet been defined. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of all published articles from MEDLINE and EMBASE to explore the outcomes of these two procedural approaches. Results:total of 55 studies including 183 patients (154 ViV and 29 ViR) were included. Patients that underwent ViV (101 transapical and 53 transseptal) using the transseptal approach required more iatrogenic atrial septal defect (ASD) closure (19% versus 0.0 %; P < 0.001) and hence had a lower device success rate (68% versus 89%; P = 0.001). However, there was no significant difference between the two groups in procedural success and all-cause mortality at 30 days. Overall severe bleeding complications (major or life threatening) were not different the two groups (3.7% versus 7.9%; P = 0.321). In the ViR group (19 transapical and 10 transseptal), no difference in procedural success, device success or 30-day outcomes were identified between transseptal and transapical groups, although sample size was small. Conclusion: In conclusion, mitral ViV and ViR using the two different procedural approaches appear to confer equal and reasonable 30-day outcomes.

Metrics

1 Record Views
12 citations in Web of Science

Details

UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

This publication has contributed to the advancement of the following goals:

#3 Good Health and Well-Being

InCites Highlights

Data related to this publication, from InCites Benchmarking & Analytics tool:

Web of Science research areas
Cardiac & Cardiovascular Systems
Logo image