How Do Transcatheter Heart Valves Fit in Mitral Annuloplasty Rings and Which Combination Can be Recommended?
28 October 2017
12 February 2018
08 May 2018 (online)
Background Transcatheter heart valve (THV) as valve-in-ring is increasingly used in the mitral position. Semi-rigid rings may serve as a more appropriate scaffold for proper anchoring of a THV as they may change from their oval to a round shape thereby fitting to the implanted THV.
Methods One rigid and five semi-rigid rings of four manufacturers, Edwards Physio I and II, Sorin 3D Memo, Medtronic Simulus, and St. Jude Medical (SJM) Saddle and SJM Sequin, with sizes 28 to 36 mm and Edwards Sapien III THV 23, 26, and 29 mm were used. Preevaluation comprised insertion/inflation of the THV into the ring and visual inspection for the paravalvular gap ≥ 4 mm2. Only valves not showing paravalvular gap were then submitted to hemodynamic evaluation with a pulse duplicator. Cusp movement was assessed with a high-speed-camera. Mean transvalvular gradients (TVGs) were measured.
Results SJM Saddle ring of all sizes and SJM Sequin ring 34 showed marked gaps combined with all THV sizes, thus not undergoing hemodynamic testing. It was further shown that ring sizes ≥ 36 mm did not allow for a proper fit of even the largest THV into the ring of all the manufacturers and were consequently not hemodynamically evaluated. The 23 mm THV was too small for any ring size. The lowest gradients were achieved with the 26 mm THV in 30 and 32 mm and the 29 mm THV in 32 and 34 mm rings.
Conclusion Not all currently available annuloplasty rings are ideal scaffolds for THV placement. It appears that a more proper fit can be achieved with semi-rigid rings than with rigid ones. Note that 23 mm THV appeared to be too small for an adequate anchoring in even the smallest available ring. Thus, 26 mm as well as 29 mm THV fit properly in ring sizes between 28 and 34 mm. Surgeons may consider to choose from those ring brands and sizes which allow for good placement of a THV in view of possible valve degeneration in the later course.
- 1 Zhou YX, Leobon B, Berthoumieu P. , et al. Long-term outcomes following repair or replacement in degenerative mitral valve disease. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2010; 58 (07) 415-421
- 2 Thourani VH, Weintraub WS, Guyton RA. , et al. Outcomes and long-term survival for patients undergoing mitral valve repair versus replacement: effect of age and concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting. Circulation 2003; 108 (03) 298-304
- 3 Potter DD, Sundt III TM, Zehr KJ. , et al. Risk of repeat mitral valve replacement for failed mitral valve prostheses. Ann Thorac Surg 2004; 78 (01) 67-72 , discussion 67–72
- 4 Vohra HA, Whistance RN, Roubelakis A. , et al. Outcome after redo-mitral valve replacement in adult patients: a 10-year single-centre experience. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 2012; 14 (05) 575-579
- 5 Cullen MW, Cabalka AK, Alli OO. , et al. Transvenous, antegrade Melody valve-in-valve implantation for bioprosthetic mitral and tricuspid valve dysfunction: a case series in children and adults. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2013; 6 (06) 598-605
- 6 Descoutures F, Himbert D, Maisano F. , et al. Transcatheter valve-in-ring implantation after failure of surgical mitral repair. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2013; 44 (01) e8-e15
- 7 Schäfer U, Bader R, Frerker C. , et al. Balloon-expandable valves for degenerated mitral xenografts or failing surgical rings. EuroIntervention 2014; 10 (02) 260-268
- 8 Cheung A, Webb JG, Barbanti M. , et al. 5-year experience with transcatheter transapical mitral valve-in-valve implantation for bioprosthetic valve dysfunction. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013; 61 (17) 1759-1766
- 9 Wilbring M, Alexiou K, Tugtekin SM. , et al. Transapical transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation for deteriorated mitral valve bioprostheses. Ann Thorac Surg 2013; 95 (01) 111-117
- 10 Seiffert M, Conradi L, Baldus S. , et al. Transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve implantation in patients with degenerated bioprostheses. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2012; 5 (03) 341-349
- 11 Cerillo AG, Chiaramonti F, Murzi M. , et al. Transcatheter valve in valve implantation for failed mitral and tricuspid bioprosthesis. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2011; 78 (07) 987-995
- 12 Ferrera C, Almería C, Maroto L. , et al. Mitral valve in valve: a new choice to be still cautious. Int J Cardiol 2014; 171 (02) 304-307
- 13 Nombela-Franco L, Urena M, Ribeiro HB, Rodés-Cabau J. Advances in percutaneous treatment of mitral regurgitation. Rev Esp Cardiol (Engl Ed) 2013; 66 (07) 566-582
- 14 Schichl K, Affeld K. A computer controlled versatile pulse duplicator for precision testing of artificial heart valves. Int J Artif Organs 1993; 16 (10) 722-728
- 15 Kuehnel RU, Hartrumpf M, Erb M, Albes JM. Hemodynamic performance of endovascular valves as valve-in-valve in small stented bioprosthesis. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2017; 65 (03) 225-230
- 16 Kuehnel RU, Puchner R, Pohl A. , et al. Characteristic resistance curves of aortic valve substitutes facilitate individualized decision for a particular type. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2005; 27 (03) 450-455 , discussion 455
- 17 Pohl M, Wendt MO, Werner S, Koch B, Lerche D. In vitro testing of artificial heart valves: comparison between Newtonian and non-Newtonian fluids. Artif Organs 1996; 20 (01) 37-46
- 18 Timek TA, Liang D, Daughters GT, Ingels Jr NB, Miller DC. Effect of semi-rigid or flexible mitral ring annuloplasty on anterior leaflet three-dimensional geometry. J Heart Valve Dis 2008; 17 (02) 149-154
- 19 Hu X, Zhao Q. Systematic evaluation of the flexible and rigid annuloplasty ring after mitral valve repair for mitral regurgitation. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2011; 40 (02) 480-487 . Doi: 10.1016/j.ejcts.2010.11.080
- 20 Chee T, Haston R, Togo A, Raja SG. Is a flexible mitral annuloplasty ring superior to a semi-rigid or rigid ring in terms of improvement in symptoms and survival?. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 2008; 7 (03) 477-484
- 21 Fattouch K, Moscarelli M, Castrovinci S. , et al. A comparison of 2 mitral annuloplasty rings for severe ischemic mitral regurgitation: clinical and echocardiographic outcomes. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2016; 28 (02) 261-268
- 22 Silberman S, Klutstein MW, Sabag T. , et al. Repair of ischemic mitral regurgitation: comparison between flexible and rigid annuloplasty rings. Ann Thorac Surg 2009; 87 (06) 1721-1726 , discussion 1726–1727
- 23 Bapat V, Pirone F, Kapetanakis S, Rajani R, Niederer S. Factors influencing left ventricular outflow tract obstruction following a mitral valve-in-valve or valve-in-ring procedure, part 1. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2015; 86 (04) 747-760
- 24 Bouleti C, Fassa AA, Himbert D. , et al. Transfemoral implantation of transcatheter heart valves after deterioration of mitral bioprosthesis or previous ring annuloplasty. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2015; 8 (1 Pt A): 83-91
- 25 Allende R, Doyle D, Urena M. , et al. Transcatheter mitral “valve-in-ring” implantation: a word of caution. Ann Thorac Surg 2015; 99 (04) 1439-1442
- 26 de Weger A, Ewe SH, Delgado V, Bax JJ. First-in-man implantation of a trans-catheter aortic valve in a mitral annuloplasty ring: novel treatment modality for failed mitral valve repair. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2011; 39 (06) 1054-1056
- 27 Latib A, Ruparelia N, Bijuklic K. , et al. First-in-man transcatheter mitral valve-in-ring implantation with a repositionable and retrievable aortic valve prosthesis. EuroIntervention 2016; 11 (10) 1148-1152
- 28 Bapat V. Valve-in-valve apps: why and how they were developed and how to use them. EuroIntervention 2014; 10 (Suppl U): U44-U51