Abstract:Abstract Background TAVR has become the standard of care for high–risk patients with aortic stenosis. Considering unique procedural challenges posed by native pure aortic regurgitation (NPAR), our aim was to evaluate early and mid–term results of off–label treatment with new generation devices. Materials and Methods We retrospectively enrolled 61 consecutive patients, who underwent TAVR for NPAR between 2017 and 2023, because deemed ineligible for surgery. Mean logistic and Euroscore II were 17,07±11 and 5,62±5,9, though they did not accurately reflect surgical ineligibility: 7 patients (11,5%) had active cancer and 5 (8,2%) end–stage liver failure. Patients with valve calcifications or stenosis were excluded. A CT scan was obtained to choose device model and size, and access site. A percutaneous VA ECMO support was used in patients at higher risk for hemodynamic instability and procedural failure. Local anesthesia was preferred whenever feasible. Primary endpoints were technical and device success. Secondary endpoint was clinical efficacy at 1 year. Results Mean age was 75,69±9,01. Considering the high–risk population, we adopted local anesthesia in 56 patients (91,8%), reducing ICU admission and stay (27,9% and 1,98±6,51days). Mean aortic annulus diameter, perimeter and area were 25,5±2,16mm, 82,2±5,84mm and 520,04±74,32mm2. Consequently, the most frequently implanted prostheses were Evolut R/Pro 34 (41%), Sapien 3/Ultra 29 (26,2%) and Accurate neo M (9,8%). Approximately half of the population (54,1%) was shortly supported (24,46±24,7 minutes) with fem–fem VA ECMO, reducing hemodynamic instability due to rapid pacing. However, no increase in vascular complication was observed (p=0,58). One intraprocedural death was recorded (1,6%). Although 30–day mortality was 8,2%, primary outcomes were significantly better in the second half of the population (p=0,044 and p=0,036), reflecting the role of a standardized approach and surgeons’ higher expertise. Only 4 paravalvular leaks (6,6%) were detected at 1–month follow–up, 3 mild and 1 moderate (1,6%). Mean follow–up was 18,54±18,48 months. Clinical efficacy at 1 year was 76,3%, available for 38 patients. Conclusions TAVR is still considered an off–label approach for NPAR because of increased stroke volume and absence of annular and leaflet calcification. Nonetheless a standardized approach, with the aid of brief VA ECMO support for complex cases, should be considered a safe and valid option for inoperable patients.

Safety outcomes of new versus old generation transcatheter aortic valves

Outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement for pure native aortic regurgitation with the use of newer- vs. early-generation devices

Outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve implantation for native aortic valve regurgitation

Outcomes of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Using Third-Generation Balloon-Expandable Versus Self-Expanding Valves: A Meta-analysis

Meta-analysis of short- and long-term clinical outcomes of the self-expanding Evolut R/pro valve versus the balloon-expandable Sapien 3 valve for transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Early and Mid-Term Outcomes of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement: Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Comparative one-month safety and effectiveness of five leading new-generation devices for transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Sex differences in the outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement with newer generation devices: A meta‐analysis

Comparative Outcomes of Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Elderly Patients With Severe Symptomatic Aortic Stenosis: A Systematic Review

Aortic Valve Replacement Versus Balloon Expandable And Self Expandable Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation In Low-Risk Patients

Short- and Medium-Term Outcomes Comparison of Native- and Valve-in-Valve TAVI Procedures

Outcomes of SAPIEN 3 Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Compared With Surgical Valve Replacement in Intermediate-Risk Patients

SAFETY AND EFFICACY OF TRANSCATHETER AORTIC VALVE REPLACEMENT FOR NATIVE PURE AORTIC VALVE REGURGITATION: SINGLE–CENTER EXPERIENCE

Long-Term Outcomes of Transcatheter vs Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement: Meta-analysis of Randomized Trials

Comparison of third generation balloon-expandable Edwards Sapien 3 versus self-expandable Evolut R in transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a meta-analysis

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Outcomes, Indications, Complications, and Innovations

Short- and Long-term Clinical Outcomes of Balloon-expandable Versus Self-expanding Valves in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Meta-analysis

Over a Decade of Practice

Long-term outcomes of self-expanding versus balloon-expandable transcatheter aortic valves: Insights from the OBSERVANT study

A comparison of neurological event and mortality rates between transcatheter aortic valve implantation and surgical aortic valve replacement

Demographics and outcomes of patients younger than 75 years undergoing aortic valve interventions in Rotterdam