Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 29, 2026

Standardized Technique of Aortic Valve Re-implantation for Valve-sparing Aortic Root Replacement
Published on: December 11, 2017
Reintervention for Failed Aortic Bioprostheses: Distinct Patient Profiles for Redo Surgery and Valve-in-Valve TAVR in
Daniela Geisler1, Zsuzsanna Arnold1, Marieluise Harrer1
1Department of Cardiac and Vascular Surgery, Clinic Floridsdorf, 1210 Vienna, Austria.
Abstract:
Background/Objectives: Aortic valve therapy increasingly follows a lifetime management concept. As all bioprostheses ultimately degenerate, optimal outcomes rely on the appropriate selection and timing of treatment modality. This study evaluates outcomes of redo surgical aortic valve replacement (redo-SAVR) and valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve replacement (ViV-TAVR) in a consecutive, unselected real-world cohort treated for bioprosthetic valve failure (BVF). Methods: A single-center retrospective analysis of all patients undergoing redo-SAVR or ViV-TAVR for BVF between June 2019 and December 2024 was conducted. The primary endpoint was survival at 30 days and at 1, 3, and 5 years; the secondary endpoint was time to reintervention. Cox proportional hazards models were used; proportionality was tested; subgroups were defined by indication and presence of concomitant procedures. Results: Eighty-three patients were included (redo-SAVR n = 42; ViV-TAVR n = 41). All active endocarditis cases were managed surgically. In isolated procedures, 30-day survival was 95.5% after redo-SAVR (100% when excluding endocarditis) and 100% after ViV-TAVR; 5-year survival was 81.3% and 94.1%, respectively (94.4% for isolated redo-SAVR excluding endocarditis). Because hazards were non-proportional and risk sets were sparse beyond 5 years, we fitted a time-split Cox model (0-5 years). In multivariable analysis, endocarditis (HR 4.45, 95% CI 1.16-17.04) and NYHA IV (HR 4.87, 95% CI 0.98-24.17)-not treatment modality-were associated with mortality. Conclusions: In a real-world, all-comers setting, early outcomes for isolated reinterventions were favorable with both pathways. Mortality patterns were case-mix driven-especially by endocarditis and the need for concomitant surgery. Accordingly, ViV-TAVR and redo-SAVR should be viewed not as competing procedures but as complementary, scenario-specific options within a lifetime management strategy.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Heart Valves
The AV valves prevent the backflow of blood from the ventricles to the atria during ventricular contraction. These valves function with the assistance of the chordae tendineae and papillary muscles. When the ventricles are relaxed, the chordae tendineae are slack, allowing blood to flow from the atria into the...
Mitral Valve Prolapse I: Introduction
Mitral Valve Prolapse II: Assessment and Management
Mitral Valve Prolapse III: Nursing Management
Hypothesis: Accept or Fail to Reject?
There are two ways to indicate that the null hypothesis is not rejected. 'Accept' the null...
Ribosome Profiling
Applications of ribosome profiling
Ribosome profiling has many applications, including in vivo monitoring of translation inside a particular organ or tissue type and quantifying new protein synthesis levels.
The technique...

