Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 21, 2026
Upper-extremity Approach for Secondary Access in Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation
Published on: August 8, 2025
Transapical transcatheter aortic valve-in-valve implantation: clinical and hemodynamic outcomes beyond 2 years
Jian Ye1, John G Webb, Anson Cheung
1Division of Cardiac Surgery, St. Paul's Hospital, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. jye@providencehealth.bc.ca
Objective:
The feasibility of transapical valve-in-valve aortic valve implantation into a failed aortic surgical bioprosthesis has been confirmed. The purpose of the present study was to investigate the clinical and hemodynamic outcomes more than 2 years after transapical valve-in-valve aortic valve implantation.
Methods:
From April 2007 to May 2010, 8 consecutive patients underwent transapical valve-in-valve aortic valve implantation of either 23- or 26-mm Edwards-SAPIEN balloon-expandable bioprostheses into failed surgical tissue valves (21- to 25-mm valves). Clinical and echocardiographic follow-up was performed in all patients. The mean follow-up duration was 27.8 ± 15.7 months (range, 18-55 months).
Results:
Transapical valve-in-valve aortic valve implantation was successful in all patients (mean age, 84.1 ± 1.6 years). The predicted operative mortality was 42.1% ± 15.7% by logistic European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation and 14.4% ± 9.6% using the Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk calculator. The observed 30-day mortality was 12.5%. No strokes or valve embolization/migrations occurred. The mean hospital stay was 9.0 ± 9.1 days. The New York Heart Association class decreased from preoperative class III-IV to postoperative class I in 6 of 7 survivors. The 2-year survival was 87.5%. No late mortality occurred during the follow-up period. The echocardiographic results at 1 to 4 years of follow-up demonstrated stable valve position and function in all patients. The transaortic valve pressure gradients after valve-in-valve aortic valve implantation were greater than 20 mm Hg and less than 15 mm Hg in patients with 21- or 23-mm and 25-mm surgical valves, respectively.
Conclusions:
Transapical valve-in-valve aortic valve implantation provides good clinical outcomes and stable valve function beyond 2 years of follow-up. The best hemodynamic and clinical outcomes can be achieved in the patients with a surgical valve size of 25 mm or greater. Valve-in-valve aortic valve implantation could become a viable approach for selected high-risk patients with failed surgical bioprostheses.