Dissemin is shutting down on January 1st, 2025

Published in

BMJ Publishing Group, Open Heart, 2(7), p. e001391, 2020

DOI: 10.1136/openhrt-2020-001391

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Predictors of paravalvular leak following implantation of the ACURATE neo transcatheter heart valve: the PREDICT PVL study

This paper is made freely available by the publisher.
This paper is made freely available by the publisher.

Full text: Download

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Green circle
Postprint: archiving allowed
Green circle
Published version: archiving allowed
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

ObjectivesReport predictors and the natural course of paravalvular leak (PVL) following implantation of the ACURATE neo transcatheter heart valve (THV).BackgroundUnderstanding the mechanisms of PVL may help to improve patient selection, patient outcomes and the design of next-generation THVs.MethodsA total of 30 patients (mean age 81±5 years, 47% women) undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement with the ACURATE neo were enrolled in the PREDICT PVL study. The effective regurgitant orifice area (EROA, in mm2) of PVL was assessed by transthoracic and transoesophageal echocardiography before discharge and at 6 months follow-up.ResultsPVL was none/trace in 10 (33%), mild in 18 (60%) and moderate in 2 (7%) patients and occurred in distinct locations with largest EROAs in the area of the left coronary cusp and its adjacent commissures. Independent predictors for EROA were implantation depth (r coefficient −1.9 mm2 per mm implantation depth, p=0.01), leaflet calcification (6.2 mm2 per calcification grade, p=0.03) and THV size L (7.6 mm2 more than size S or M, p=0.01). At 6 months follow-up, EROA decreased by 29% from 13.7±9.7 mm2 to 9.5±7.9 mm2 (p<0.01). Patients with smaller EROAs were more likely to be in New York Heart Association class 1 than patients with larger EROAs (p<0.01).ConclusionsPVL occurred predominantly in the region of the left coronary cusp and decreased by 29% during 6 months of follow-up. Our results underscore the importance of adequate patient selection and optimal implantation depth.