Evaluation of structural valve deterioration and bioprosthetic valve failure utilizing the new European consensus definition in patients undergoing TAVI with first-generation devices: Outcomes beyond 5 years from a single center in Turkey

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.contributor.authorSentürk, B.
dc.contributor.authorDursun, H.
dc.contributor.authorÇöllüoglu, T.
dc.contributor.authorÖzdamar, H.
dc.contributor.authorEkin, T.
dc.contributor.authorTanriverdi, Z.
dc.contributor.authorKaya, D.
dc.date.accessioned2024-09-29T16:16:06Z
dc.date.available2024-09-29T16:16:06Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.departmentKarabük Üniversitesien_US
dc.description.abstractObjective: The long-term durability of transcatheter aortic bioprosthetic valves continues to be a major concern. Standardized criteria of the structural valve deterioration (SVD) and bioprosthetic valve failure (BVF) have recently been defined. Limited studies have evaluated the long-term durability of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) according to these new definitions. We aim to analyze the durability of TAVI beyond 5 years and to report the frequency of SVD and BVF. Methods: A total of 89 patients who had undergone TAVI and had theoretically completed at least 5 years after the procedure were included. Either a Medtronic CoreValve or an Edwards SAPIEN XT valve were implanted in the patients. New standardized definitions were used to evaluate SVD and BVF. Results: The mean age of the patients was 78.70±6.95 years. SVD occured in 4 (4.5%) patients during 6 years of follow-up. Severe SVD was observed in 2 patients (2.2%), and these patients had the New York Heart Association class II symptoms. Both patients with severe SVD also met the criteria of BVF. Moderate SVD was observed in 2 patients (2.2%), and these patients had no valve-related symptoms. Of the 4 SVD cases, 2 were associated with increased mean transaortic gradients, whereas the remaining 2 cases were associated with intraprosthetic aortic regurgitation. All patients with SVD are still alive, and none of them have required aortic valve reintervention. Conclusion: Although first-generation TAVI devices were used, we determined the low rate of SVD and BVF at the 6-year follow-up. It may be suggested that there is no major concern associated with TAVI even with first-generation devices regarding long-term durability. © Copyright 2021 by Turkish Society of Cardiology - Available online at www.anatoljcardiol.comen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.5152/AnatolJCardiol.2021.37670
dc.identifier.endpage587en_US
dc.identifier.issn2149-2263
dc.identifier.issue8en_US
dc.identifier.pmid34369886en_US
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85111581830en_US
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ3en_US
dc.identifier.startpage579en_US
dc.identifier.trdizinid510201en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.5152/AnatolJCardiol.2021.37670
dc.identifier.urihttps://search.trdizin.gov.tr/tr/yayin/detay/510201
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14619/8863
dc.identifier.volume25en_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopusen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakTR-Dizinen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMeden_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherTurkish Society of Cardiologyen_US
dc.relation.ispartofAnatolian Journal of Cardiologyen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.subjectAortic valve stenosisen_US
dc.subjectHeart valvesen_US
dc.subjectTranscatheter aortic valve implantationen_US
dc.titleEvaluation of structural valve deterioration and bioprosthetic valve failure utilizing the new European consensus definition in patients undergoing TAVI with first-generation devices: Outcomes beyond 5 years from a single center in Turkeyen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
PubMed İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
TR-Dizin İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu