Management of Failed Bioprosthetic Aortic Valves: Mitigating Complications and Optimizing Outcomes

1Citations
Citations of this article
7Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

The use of bioprosthetic prostheses during surgical aortic valve replacements has increased dramatically over the last two decades, accounting for over 85% of surgical implantations. Given limited long-term durability, there has been an increase in aortic valve reoperations and reinterventions. With the advent of new technologies, multiple treatment strategies are available to treat bioprosthetic valve failure, including valve-in-valve (ViV) transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). However, ViV TAVR has an increased risk of higher gradients and patient prosthesis mismatch (PPM) secondary to placing the new valve within the rigid frame of the prior valve, especially in patients with a small surgical bioprosthesis in situ. Bioprosthetic valve fracture allows for placement of a larger transcatheter valve, as well as a fully expanded transcatheter valve, decreasing postoperative gradients and the risk of PPM.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Norton, E. L., Ward, A. F., Greenbaum, A., & Grubb, K. J. (2022). Management of Failed Bioprosthetic Aortic Valves: Mitigating Complications and Optimizing Outcomes. Journal of Interventional Cardiology. Hindawi Limited. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/9737245

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free