Outcomes of Redo Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement According to the Initial and Subsequent Valve Type

Uri Landes*, Ilan Richter, Haim Danenberg, Ran Kornowski, Janarthanan Sathananthan, Ole De Backer, Lars Søndergaard, Mohamed Abdel-Wahab, Sung Han Yoon, Raj R. Makkar, Holger Thiele, Won Keun Kim, Christian Hamm, Nicola Buzzatti, Matteo Montorfano, Sebastian Ludwig, Niklas Schofer, Lisa Voigtlaender, Mayra Guerrero, Abdallah El SabbaghJosep Rodés-Cabau, Jules Mesnier, Taishi Okuno, Thomas Pilgrim, Claudia Fiorina, Antonio Colombo, Antonio Mangieri, Helene Eltchaninoff, Luis Nombela-Franco, Maarten P.H. Van Wiechen, Nicolas M. Van Mieghem, Didier Tchétché, Wolfgang H. Schoels, Matthias Kullmer, Marco Barbanti, Corrado Tamburino, Jan Malte Sinning, Baravan Al-Kassou, Gidon Y. Perlman, Alfonso Ielasi, Chiara Fraccaro, Giuseppe Tarantini, Federico De Marco, Guy Witberg, Simon R. Redwood, John C. Lisko, Vasilis C. Babaliaros, Mika Laine, Roberto Nerla, Ariel Finkelstein, Amnon Eitan, Ronen Jaffe, Philipp Ruile, Franz J. Neumann, Nicolo Piazza, Horst Sievert, Kolja Sievert, Marco Russo, Martin Andreas, Matjaz Bunc, Azeem Latib, Sharon Bruoha, Rebecca Godfrey, David Hildick-Smith, Israel Barbash, Amit Segev, Pál Maurovich-Horvat, Balint Szilveszter, Konstantinos Spargias, Dionisis Aravadinos, Tamim M. Nazif, Martin B. Leon, John G. Webb

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

7 Citations (Scopus)


Background: As transcatheter aortic valve (TAV) replacement is increasingly used in patients with longer life expectancy, a sizable proportion will require redo TAV replacement (TAVR). The unique configuration of balloon-expandable TAV (bTAV) vs a self-expanding TAV (sTAV) potentially affects TAV-in-TAV outcome. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to better inform prosthesis selection, TAV-in-TAV outcomes were assessed according to the type of initial and subsequent TAV. Methods: Patients from the Redo-TAVR registry were analyzed using propensity weighting according to their initial valve type (bTAV [n = 115] vs sTAV [n = 106]) and subsequent valve type (bTAV [n = 130] vs sTAV [n = 91]). Results: Patients with failed bTAVs presented later (vs sTAV) (4.9 ± 2.1 years vs 3.7 ± 2.3 years; P < 0.001), with smaller effective orifice area (1.0 ± 0.7 cm2 vs 1.3 ± 0.8 cm2; P = 0.018) and less frequent dominant regurgitation (16.2% vs 47.3%; P < 0.001). Mortality at 30 days was 2.3% (TAV-in-bTAV) vs 0% (TAV-in-sTAV) (P = 0.499) and 1.7% (bTAV-in-TAV) vs 1.0% (sTAV-in-TAV) (P = 0.612); procedural safety was 72.6% (TAV-in-bTAV) vs 71.2% (TAV-in-sTAV) (P = 0.817) and 73.2% (bTAV-in-TAV) vs 76.5% (sTAV-in-TAV) (P = 0.590). Device success was similar according to initial valve type but higher with subsequent sTAV vs bTAV (77.2% vs 64.3%; P = 0.045), primarily because of lower residual gradients (10.3 mm Hg [8.9-11.7 mm Hg] vs 15.2 mm Hg [13.2-17.1 mm Hg]; P < 0.001). Residual regurgitation (moderate or greater) was similar after bTAV-in-TAV and sTAV-in-TAV (5.7%) and nominally higher after TAV-in-bTAV (9.1%) vs TAV-in-sTAV (4.4%) (P = 0.176). Conclusions: In selected patients, no association was observed between TAV type and redo TAVR safety or mortality, yet subsequent sTAV was associated with higher device success because of lower redo gradients. These findings are preliminary, and more data are needed to guide valve choice for redo TAVR.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1543-1554
Number of pages12
JournalJACC: Cardiovascular Interventions
Issue number15
Publication statusPublished - 8 Aug 2022

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
Dr Webb is a consultant to and has received research funding from Edwards Lifesciences, Abbott Vascular, and Boston Scientific. Dr Kim is a proctor for and has received speaker fees from Boston Scientific, Abbott, Edwards Lifesciences, and Medtronic. Dr Abdel-Wahab has received speaker honoraria and/or consultancy fees to the hospital on his behalf from Boston Scientific and Medtronic. Dr Barbanti is a consultant for Edwards Lifesciences; and is an advisory board member for Biotronik. Dr Søndergaard has received consulting fees and institutional research grants from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, and Symetis. Dr Redwood is a proctor for and has received lecture fees from Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Hamm is an advisory board member for Medtronic. Dr Sinning has received speaker honoraria and research grants from Medtronic, Boston Scientific, and Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Sathananthan is a consultant to Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Schofer has received speaker fees and travel compensation from Boston Scientific; and has received travel compensation from Edwards Lifesciences and Abbott/St. Jude Medical. Dr Andreas is a proctor, consultant, and speaker for Edwards Lifesciences, Abbott, and Medtronic; and has received institutional grants from Edwards Lifesciences, Abbott, Medtronic, and LSI. Dr Guerrero has received research grant support from Abbott Vascular and Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Castriota is a proctor for Medtronic and Boston Scientific. Dr Nazif is a consultant for or has received honoraria from Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Biotrace, and Baylis Medical; and is a consultant for and holds equity in Venus Medtech. Dr Pilgrim has received research grants from Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, and Biotronik; and has received speaker fees from Boston Scientific and Biotronik. Dr Babaliaros is a consultant to Edwards Lifesciences; and holds equity in Transmural Systems. Dr Van Mieghem has received institutional research grants and consulting fees from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Daiichi Sankyo, and PulseCath; and has received institutional research grant support from Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Latib has received institutional research and grant support from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and Edwards Lifesciences; and has received personal consulting honoraria from Abbott, Edwards Lifesciences, and Medtronic. Dr Hildick-Smith is a proctor and adviser for Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and Edwards Lifesciences. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose.

Publisher Copyright: © 2022


Dive into the research topics of 'Outcomes of Redo Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement According to the Initial and Subsequent Valve Type'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this