Vol. 19 No. 2 (2015)
ACQUIRED HEART DISEASES

Immediate results of mitral valve-in-valve implantation for bioprosthetic valve dysfunction

PDF (Русский)
  • L. Barbarash,
  • A. Stasev,
  • S. Kokorin,
  • N. Rutkovskaya,
  • I. Sizova
L. Barbarash
Research Institute for Complex Problems of Cardiovascular Diseases, 6 Sosnovy Bvld., Kemerovo, 650002, Russian Federation
Bio
A. Stasev
Research Institute for Complex Problems of Cardiovascular Diseases, 6 Sosnovy Bvld., Kemerovo, 650002, Russian Federation
Bio
S. Kokorin
Research Institute for Complex Problems of Cardiovascular Diseases, 6 Sosnovy Bvld., Kemerovo, 650002, Russian Federation
Bio
N. Rutkovskaya
Research Institute for Complex Problems of Cardiovascular Diseases, 6 Sosnovy Bvld., Kemerovo, 650002, Russian Federation
Bio
I. Sizova
Research Institute for Complex Problems of Cardiovascular Diseases, 6 Sosnovy Bvld., Kemerovo, 650002, Russian Federation
Bio
DOI: https://doi.org/10.21688/1681-3472-2015-2-36-41

Published 2015-10-08

Keywords

  • mitral valve,
  • bioprosthesis,
  • redo procedure,
  • valve-in-valve

How to Cite

Barbarash, L., Stasev, A., Kokorin, S., Rutkovskaya, N., & Sizova, I. (2015). Immediate results of mitral valve-in-valve implantation for bioprosthetic valve dysfunction. Patologiya Krovoobrashcheniya I Kardiokhirurgiya, 19(2), 36–41. https://doi.org/10.21688/1681-3472-2015-2-36-41

Copyright (c) 2015 Barbarash L.S., Stasev A.N., Kokorin S.G., Rutkovskaya N.V., Sizova I.N.

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Abstract

Background. Patients with bioprosthetic valve dysfunction have a higher risk for redo procedures because of advanced age, comorbidities and redo-related technical difficulties. Thus, valve-in-valve replacement seems to be an easier and safer option for this group of patients.
Objective. To assess the immediate results of mitral valve-in-valve implantation for bioprosthetic valve dysfunction.
Methods. 6 patients underwent mitral valve-in-valve implantation using “UniLine” prostheses at Kemerovo Research Institute for Complex Problems of Cardiovascular Diseases in 2014.
Results. There were no cases of in-hospital deaths and prosthesis-related complications in the group under study. Satisfactory performance of bioprostheses was confirmed by echocardiography offered to all the patients before their discharge.
Conclusion. Mitral valve-in-valve implantation for bioprosthetic valve dysfunction allows achieving satisfactory immediate results.

PDF (Русский)

References

  1. Kaneko T. et al. Mechanical versus bioprosthetic mitral valve replacement in patients <65 years old // J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 2014. Vol. 147. № 1. P. 117–126.
  2. Tillquist M.N., Maddox T.M. Cardiac crossroads: deciding between mechanical or bioprosthetic heart valve replacement // Patient Prefer. Adherence. 2011. Vol. № 5. P. 91–99.
  3. Onorati F. et al. Mid-term results of aortic valve surgery in redo scenarios in the current practice: results from the multicentre European RECORD (REdo Cardiac Operation Research Database) initiative // Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg. 2014. P. ezu116.
  4. Akins C. et al. Guidelines for Reporting Mortality and Morbidity After Cardiac Valve Interventions // Ann. Thorac. Surg. 2008. Vol. 85. № 4. P. 1490–1495.
  5. Raffa H. et al. Superimposition of a Mechanical Valve on an Impacted Aortic Bioprosthesis // Tex. Heart Inst. J. 1991. Vol. 18. № 3. P. 199–201.
  6. Stassano P. et al. Mid-term results of the valve-on-valve technique for bioprosthetic failure // Eur. J. Cardio-Thorac. Surg. Off. J. Eur. Assoc. Cardio-Thorac. Surg. 2000. Vol. 18. № 4. P. 453–457.
  7. Geha A.S., Massad M.G., Snow N.J. Replacement of degenerated mitral and aortic bioprostheses without explantation // Ann. Thorac. Surg. 2001. Vol. 72. № 5. P. 1509–1514.
  8. Tamura Y. et al. Re-do mitral valve replacement using the valve-on-valve technique: a case report // Ann. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. Off. J. Assoc. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. Asia. 2005. Vol. 11. № 2. P. 125–127.
  9. Wenaweser P. et al. Percutaneous aortic valve replacement for severe aortic regurgitation in degenerated bioprosthesis: The first valve in valve procedure using the corevalve revalving system // Catheter. Cardiovasc. Interv. 2007. Vol. 70. № 5. P. 760–764.
  10. Azadani A.N., Tseng E.E. Transcatheter Heart Valves for Failing Bioprostheses State-of-the-Art Review of Valve-in-Valve Implantation // Circ. Cardiovasc. Interv. 2011. Vol. 4. № 6. P. 621–628.
  11. Gurvitch R. et al. Transcatheter Valve-in-Valve Implantation for Failed Surgical Bioprosthetic Valves // J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2011. Vol. 58. № 21. P. 2196–2209.
  12. Milburn K., Bapat V., Thomas M. Valve-in-valve implantations: is this the new standard for degenerated bioprostheses? Review of the literature // Clin. Res. Cardiol. 2014. Vol. 103. № 6. P. 1–13.
  13. Рогулина Н.В. и др. Ультразвуковая оценка протезов МИКС, МЕДИНЖ-2, КемКор, ПериКор в митральной позиции // Кардиология и сердечно-сосудистая хирургия. 2014. № 1. P. 44–49.
  14. Рогулина Н.В., Сизова И.Н., Горбунова Е.В. Левые отделы сердца после коррекции митрального порока протезами: “МИКС”, “МЕДИНЖ-2”, “КЕМКОР”, “ПЕРИКОР” // Российский кардиологический журнал. 2013. № 5. P. 35–39.
  15. Zoghbi W.A. et al. Recommendations for Evaluation of Prosthetic Valves With Echocardiography and Doppler Ultrasound // J. Am. Soc. Echocardiogr. 2009. Vol. 22. № 9. P. 975–1014.