TY  - BOOK
AU  - Schults, Christian C
AU  - Waksman, Ron
TI  - Explant vs Redo-TAVR After Transcatheter Valve Failure: Mid-Term Outcomes From the EXPLANTORREDO-TAVR International Registry
SN  - 1936-8798
PY  - 2023///
KW  - *Aortic Valve Stenosis
KW  - *Heart Valve Prosthesis
KW  - *Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation
KW  - *Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement
KW  - Aortic Valve Stenosis/dg [Diagnostic Imaging]
KW  - Aortic Valve Stenosis/su [Surgery]
KW  - Aortic Valve/dg [Diagnostic Imaging]
KW  - Aortic Valve/su [Surgery]
KW  - Humans
KW  - Prosthesis Design
KW  - Registries
KW  - Risk Factors
KW  - Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement/ae [Adverse Effects]
KW  - Treatment Outcome
KW  - Automated
KW  - MedStar Heart & Vascular Institute
KW  - Journal Article
KW  - Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
N1  - Available online through MWHC library: 2008 - present
N2  - BACKGROUND: Valve reintervention after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) failure has not been studied in detail; CONCLUSIONS: In this first report of the EXPLANTORREDO-TAVR global registry, TAVR-explant had a shorter median time to reintervention, with less structural valve degeneration, more prosthesis-patient mismatch, and similar paravalvular leak rates compared with redo-TAVR. TAVR-explant had higher mortality at 30 days and 1 year, but similar rates on landmark analysis after 30 days. Copyright © 2023 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved; METHODS: From May 2009 to February 2022, 396 patients in the international EXPLANTORREDO-TAVR registry underwent TAVR-explant (181, 46.4%) or redo-TAVR (215, 54.3%) for transcatheter heart valve (THV) failure during a separate admission from the initial TAVR. Outcomes were reported at 30 days and 1 year; OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to determine outcomes of TAVR surgical explantation (TAVR-explant) vs redo-TAVR because they are largely unknown; RESULTS: The incidence of reintervention after THV failure was 0.59% with increasing volume during the study period. Median time from index-TAVR to reintervention was shorter in TAVR-explant vs redo-TAVR (17.6 months [IQR: 5.0-40.7 months] vs 45.7 months [IQR: 10.6-75.6 months]; P < 0.001], respectively. TAVR-explant had more prosthesis-patient mismatch (17.1% vs 0.5%; P < 0.001) as the indication for reintervention, whereas redo-TAVR had more structural valve degeneration (63.7% vs 51.9%; P = 0.023), with a similar incidence of >=moderate paravalvular leak between groups (28.7% vs 32.8% in redo-TAVR; P = 0.44). There was a similar proportion of balloon-expandable THV failures (39.8% TAVR-explant vs 40.5% redo-TAVR; P = 0.92). Median follow-up was 11.3 (IQR: 1.6-27.1 months) after reintervention. Compared with redo-TAVR, TAVR-explant had higher mortality at 30 days (13.6% vs 3.4%; P < 0.001) and 1 year (32.4% vs 15.4%; P = 0.001), with similar stroke rates between groups. On landmark analysis, mortality was similar between groups after 30 days (P = 0.91)
UR  - https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2023.01.376
ER  -