Goldstein, Bryan H

BACKGROUND: Anatomic selection for Harmony valve implant is determined with the aid of a screening report and perimeter plot (PP) that depicts the perimeter-derived radius along the right ventricular outflow tract (RVOT) and projects device oversizing. The PP provides an estimation of suitability for implant, but its sensitivity as a screening method is unknown. This study was performed to describe anatomic features and outcomes in patients who underwent Harmony TPV25 implant despite a PP that predicted inadequate oversizing. METHODS: We reviewed RVOT anatomic features and measurements in patients who underwent transcatheter pulmonary valve replacement with the Harmony TPV25 device despite a PP that predicted inadequate oversizing. RESULTS: This study included 22 patients. There were no unsuccessful implants or adverse valve-related events. Anatomic features varied, but all patients fit into 1 of 3 anatomic types characterized by differences in RVOT dimensions. Type 1 patients (n=9) had a long RVOT with a choke point and a wide main pulmonary artery. Type 2 patients (n=6) had a short RVOT that was pyramidal in shape, with no choke point, and extensive main pulmonary artery lengthening/expansion during systole. Type 3 patients (n=7) had a short, bulbous main pulmonary artery with a choke point and an open pulmonary artery bifurcation. CONCLUSIONS: Transcatheter pulmonary valve replacement with the Harmony valve is feasible in some patients whose PP fit analysis predicts inadequate oversizing. All cases in this series fit into 1 of 3 anatomic patterns, which are not identified in the screening report. Implanters must review cases individually to assess the feasibility of the implant.

ObjectivesTo describe acute and mid‐term results of hybrid perventricular device closure of muscular ventricular septal defects (mVSDs).BackgroundPerventricular device closure of mVSDs can mitigate technical limitations of percutaneous closure and need for cardiopulmonary bypass or ventriculotomy with a surgical approach.MethodsThis is a multicenter retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing hybrid perventricular mVSD device closure from 1/2004 to 1/2014. Procedural details, adverse events, outcomes, and follow‐up data were collected. Patients were divided into two groups: (1) simple (mVSD closure alone) and (2) complex (mVSD closure with concomitant cardiac surgery).ResultsForty‐seven patients (60% female) underwent perventricular mVSD device closure at a median age of 5.2 months (IQR 1.8–8.9) and weight of 5.1 kg (IQR 4.0–6.9). Procedural success was 91% [100% (n = 22) simple and 84% (n = 21/25) complex]. Adverse events occurred in 19% (9/47) [9% (2/22) simple and 28% (7/25) complex]. Hospital length of stay (LOS) was shorter in the simple vs. complex group (4 vs. 14 days, P < 0.01). At mid‐term follow‐up of 19.2 months (IQR 2.3–43) 90% of pts had complete mVSD closure; none developed late heart block, increased atrioventricular (AV) valve insufficiency or ventricular dysfunction.ConclusionsPerventricular device closure of simple mVSD was associated with a high rate of procedural success, few adverse events, and short hospital LOS. Procedural adverse events were associated with the presence of concomitant complex surgery. Residual mVSD, AV valve insufficiency, or ventricular dysfunction were uncommon at mid‐term follow‐up. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Background— Off-label use of transcatheter aortic and pulmonary valve prostheses for tricuspid valve-in-valve implantation (TVIV) within dysfunctional surgical tricuspid valve (TV) bioprostheses has been described in small reports. Methods and Results— An international, multicenter registry was developed to collect data on TVIV cases. Patient-related factors, procedural details and outcomes, and follow-up data were analyzed. Valve-in-ring or heterotopic TV implantation procedures were not included. Data were collected on 156 patients with bioprosthetic TV dysfunction who underwent catheterization with planned TVIV. The median age was 40 years, and 71% of patients were in New York Heart Association class III or IV. Among 152 patients in whom TVIV was attempted with a Melody (n=94) or Sapien (n=58) valve, implantation was successful in 150, with few serious complications. After TVIV, both the TV inflow gradient and tricuspid regurgitation grade improved significantly. During follow-up (median, 13.3 months), 22 patients died, 5 within 30 days; all 22 patients were in New York Heart Association class III or IV, and 9 were hospitalized before TVIV. There were 10 TV reinterventions, and 3 other patients had significant recurrent TV dysfunction. At follow-up, 77% of patients were in New York Heart Association class I or II ( P <0.001 versus before TVIV). Outcomes did not differ according to surgical valve size or TVIV valve type. Conclusions— TVIV with commercially available transcatheter prostheses is technically and clinically successful in patients of various ages across a wide range of valve size. Although preimplantation clinical status was associated with outcome, many patients in New York Heart Association class III or IV at baseline improved. TVIV should be considered a viable option for treatment of failing TV bioprostheses.