Balloon-Expandable vs Self-Expanding Valves for Transcatheter Treatment of Sievers Type 1 Bicuspid Aortic Stenosis

Andrea Buono, Andrea Zito, Won-Keun Kim, Tommaso Fabris, Chiara De Biase, Michele Bellamoli, Nicholas Montarello, Giuliano Costa, Mesfer Alfadhel, Ofir Koren, Simone Fezzi, Barbara Bellini, Mauro Massussi, Andrea Scotti, Lin Bai, Giulia Costa, Alessandro Mazzapicchi, Enrico Giacomin, Riccardo Gorla, Karsten HugCarlo Briguori, Luca Bettari, Antonio Messina, Mauro Boiago, Emmanuel Villa, Matthias Renker, Mario Garcia Gomez, Chiara Fraccaro, Maria Luisa De Rosa, Vivek Patel, Carlo Trani, Marco De Carlo, Giulia Laterra, Alessia Latini, Dario Pellegrini, Alfonso Ielasi, Ady Orbach, Uri Landes, Tobias Rheude, Luca Testa, Ignacio Amat Santos, Antonio Mangieri, Francesco Saia, Luca Favero, Mao Chen, Marianna Adamo, Azeem Latib, Anna Sonia Petronio, Matteo Montorfano, Raj R Makkar, Darren Mylotte, Daniel J Blackman, Francesco Burzotta, Marco Barbanti, Ole De Backer, Didier Tchètchè, Diego Maffeo, Giuseppe Tarantini

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background: Balloon-expandable valves (BEVs) and self-expanding valves (SEVs) have different features that may impact the outcomes of patients with Sievers type 1 bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Objectives: This study sought to compare procedural and clinical outcomes of BEVs and SEVs in Sievers type 1 BAV stenosis. Methods: AD-HOC (Characteristics, Sizing, and Outcomes of Stenotic Raphe-Type Bicuspid Aortic Valves Treated With Transcatheter Device Implantation) is an observational registry enrolling patients with Sievers type 1 BAV stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement with current-generation BEVs and SEVs at 24 international centers. A 1:1 propensity score matching analysis was performed to adjust for baseline imbalances. The primary endpoint was midterm major adverse events, defined as a composite of all-cause death, neurologic events, or hospitalization for heart failure. Results: Among 955 eligible patients, propensity score matching resulted in 301 pairs. At a median follow-up of 1.3 years, BEVs and SEVs had a similar risk of major adverse events (BEV vs SEV: HR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.49-1.16; P = 0.200). Technical success was similar (OR: 1.38; 95% CI: 0.63-3.04; P = 0.421). At 30 days, BEVs were associated with a lower risk of new permanent pacemaker implantation (OR: 0.42; 95% CI: 0.24-0.72; P = 0.002) and moderate or greater paravalvular regurgitation (OR: 0.16; 95% CI: 0.05-0.48; P = 0.001) but a higher risk of severe patient-prosthesis mismatch (OR: 3.03; 95% CI 1.02-8.95; P = 0.045). Conclusions: Current-generation BEVs and SEVs proved similar technical success and midterm clinical efficacy in Sievers type 1 BAV stenosis. Compared to SEVs, BEVs were associated with less permanent pacemaker implantation and moderate or greater paravalvular regurgitation but with more severe patient-prosthesis mismatch.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)2596-2608
Number of pages13
JournalJACC: Cardiovascular Interventions
Volume17
Issue number22
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2024

Keywords

  • balloon expandable
  • bicuspid aortic valve
  • raphe
  • self-expanding
  • transcatheter aortic valve replacement

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Balloon-Expandable vs Self-Expanding Valves for Transcatheter Treatment of Sievers Type 1 Bicuspid Aortic Stenosis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this