Israel Medical Association Journal

Background: The rate of mitral bioprosthesis implantation in clinical practice is increasing. Transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation has been described for high risk patients requiring redo valve surgery. 

Objectives: To report our experience with transapical valve-in-valve implantation for failed mitral bioprosthesis.

Methods: Since 2010, 10 patients have undergone transapical valve-in-valve implantation for failed bioprosthesis in our center. Aortic valve-in-valve implantation was performed in one of them and mitral valve-in-valve implantation in nine. Mean age was 82 ± 4 years and 6 were female (67%). Mean time from original mitral valve (MV) replacement to valve-in-valve procedure was 10.5 ± 3.7 years. Follow-up was completed by all patients with a mean duration of 13 ± 12 months. 

Results: Preoperatively, all patients presented with significant mitral regurgitation; two with mitral stenosis due to structural valve failure. All nine patients underwent successful transapical valve-in-valve implantation with an Edwards Sapien™ balloon expandable valve. There was no in-hospital mortality. Mean and median hospital duration was 15 ± 18 and 7 days respectively. Valve implantation was successful in all patients and there were no major complications, except for major femoral access bleeding in one patient. At last follow-up, all patients were alive and in NYHA functional class I or II. Echocardiography follow-up demonstrated that mitral regurgitation was absent or trivial in seven patients and mild in two. At follow-up, peak and mean gradients changed from 26 ± 4 and 8 ± 2 at baseline to 16.7 ± 3 and 7.3 ± 1.5, respectively.

Conclusions: Transcatheter transapical mitral valve-in-valve implantation for failed bioprosthesis is feasible in selected high risk patients. Our early experience with this strategy is encouraging. Larger randomized trials with long-term clinical and echocardiographic follow-up are recommended.

 

Background: Data regarding the epidemiology of secondary pulmonary hypertension are scanty.

Objectives: To describe the spectrum and relative incidence of background diseases in patients with significant secondary PHT.

Methods: We identified 671 patients with systolic pulmonary artery pressure of 45 mm Hg or more from the database of the echocardiographic laboratory. Their background diseases were recorded and classified into three subgroups: cardiac, pulmonary and pulmonary vascular disease without pulmonary parenchymal disease. Age at the first echocardiographic study, gender and systolic PAP values were recorded. Data between the three subgroups were compared.

Results: The mean age of the patients was 6515 years, mean systolic PAP 6114 mm Hg and female:male ratio 1.21:1. At the time of diagnosis 85% of the patients were older than 50. PHT was secondary to cardiac disease in 579 patients (86.3%), to PVD without PPD in 54 patients (8%) and to PPD in only 38 patients (5.7%). Mean age and mean systolic PAP did not differ significantly among the three subgroups. There was a significantly higher female: male ratio in patients with PVD without PPD compared with cardiac or pulmonary diseases (1.7:1 vs. 1.2:1 and 1.7 vs. 0.8:1 respectively, P0.05).

Conclusions: The majority of patients with significant PHT are elderly with heart disease. PVD without PPD and chronic PPD are a relatively uncommon cause of significant PHT. Since the diagnosis of PHT is of clinical significance and sometimes merits different therapeutic interventions, we recommend screening by Doppler echocardiography for patients with high risk background diseases.