Transapical Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Ukraine: Primary Experience in XPand Device Usage

  • G. I. Yemets Ukrainian Children’s Cardiac Center, Clinic for Adults, Kyiv, Ukraine https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6139-6235
  • O. V. Telehuzova Ukrainian Children’s Cardiac Center, Clinic for Adults, Kyiv, Ukraine https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4801-093X
  • G. B. Mankovsky Ukrainian Children’s Cardiac Center, Clinic for Adults, Kyiv, Ukraine
  • A. V. Maksymenko Ukrainian Children’s Cardiac Center, Clinic for Adults, Kyiv, Ukraine https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6615-9036
  • Y. Y. Marushko Ukrainian Children’s Cardiac Center, Clinic for Adults, Kyiv, Ukraine
  • A. A. Dovgalyuk Ukrainian Children’s Cardiac Center, Clinic for Adults, Kyiv, Ukraine
  • A. A. Sokol Ukrainian Children’s Cardiac Center, Clinic for Adults, Kyiv, Ukraine
  • I. M. Yemets Ukrainian Children’s Cardiac Center, Clinic for Adults, Kyiv, Ukraine https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1893-0164
DOI: https://doi.org/10.30702/ujcvs/20.4009/047061-067/77
Keywords: aortic valve, aortic stenosis, transcatheter aortic valve implantation, XPand

Abstract

Background. Recent developments in the field of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) have led to arised interest for the optimization of this procedure and related devices for patients with severe aortic valve stenosis. This is the first study to examine novel XPand device, jointly developed by German, French and Ukrainian scientists. This study aims to contribute to this growing area of research by exploring efficacy and safety in patients with severe aortic stenosis.

Objective. To evaluate the procedure effectiveness and long-term outcomes for XPand device implantation in patients with severe aortic valve stenosis.

Materials and methods. We initiated a single-center clinical trial to evaluate the XPand device and already perform an initial analysis of the primary outcomes. After patients fitted the inclusion criteria full examination they underwent TAVI procedure using the XPand system. Postoperative result evaluation was performed according to the established protocol.

Outcomes. Primary good results for TAVI XPand were obtained in all patients (n = 7). The average length of stay in the hospital after the procedure was 20 ± 1.25 days. The postoperative period was unremarkable. In 71.5% of patients the minimal paravalvular insufficiency or insufficiency absence were obtained after the final aortography.

Comments. The first experience of using modern device XPand for transcatheter implantation of the aortic valve prosthesis confirms its effectiveness and safety in patients with severe aortic stenosis.

References

  1. Osnabrugge RL, Mylotte D, Head SJ, Van Mieghem NM, Nkomo VT, LeReun CM, Bogers AJ, Piazza N, Kappetein AP. Aortic stenosis in the elderly: disease prevalence and number of candidates for transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a meta-analysis and modeling study. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2013 Sep 10;62(11):1002-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2013.05.015
  2. Bloomfield P. Choice of heart valve prosthesis. Heart (British Cardiac Society). 2002;87(6):5839. https://doi.org/10.1136/heart.87.6.583
  3. Schwarz F, Baumann P, Manthey J, Hoffmann M, Schuler G, Mehmel HC, Schmitz W, Kübler W. The effect of aortic valve replacement on survival. Circulation. 1982;66(5):1105-10.
  4. Collas V, Philipsen T, Rodrigus I, Vrints C, Paelinck BP, Bosmans J. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation: review and current state of the art. EMJ Int Cardiol. 2014;1:52-61.
  5. Barbanti M, Petronio AS, Ettori F, Latib A, Bedogni F, De Marco F, Poli A, Boschetti C, De Carlo M, Fiorina C, Colombo A, Brambilla N, Bruschi G, Martina P, Pandolfi C, Giannini C, Curello S, Sgroi C, Gulino S, Patanè M, Ohno Y, Tamburino C, Attizzani GF, Immè S, Gentili A, Tamburino C. 5-Year Outcomes After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation With CoreValve Prosthesis. JACC Cardiovascular interventions. 2015;8(8):1084-91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2015.03.024
  6. Toggweiler S, Kobza R. Pacemaker implantation after transcatheter aortic valve: why is this still happening? Journalofthoracicdisease.2018Nov;10(Suppl30):S3614-S3619. https://doi.org/10.21037/jtd.2018.06.103
  7. Cribier A. Historical perspective: 10th year anniversary of TAVI. EuroIntervention. 2012;8(Suppl Q):Q15-Q17. https://doi.org/10.4244/EIJV8SQA4
  8. Zhang Y, Pyxaras SA, Wolf A, Schmitz T, Naber CK. Propensity-matched comparison between Direct Flow Medical, Medtronic Corevalve, and Edwards Sapien XT prostheses: Device success, thirty-day safety, and mortality. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;85(7):1217-25. https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.25831
Published
2020-09-18
How to Cite
Yemets, G. I., Telehuzova, O. V., Mankovsky, G. B., Maksymenko, A. V., Marushko, Y. Y., Dovgalyuk, A. A., Sokol, A. A., & Yemets, I. M. (2020). Transapical Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Ukraine: Primary Experience in XPand Device Usage. Ukrainian Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery, (3 (40), 61-67. https://doi.org/10.30702/ujcvs/20.4009/047061-067/77
Issue
Ukrainian Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery No 3 (40) 2020
Section
ACQUIRED HEART DISEASES