Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has grown exponentially within the cardiology and cardiac surgical spheres. It has now become a routine approach for treating aortic stenosis. Several concerns have been raised about TAVI in comparison to conventional surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). The primary concerns regard the longevity of the valves. Several factors have been identified which may predict poor outcomes following TAVI. To this end, the lesser‐used finite element analysis (FEA) was used to quantify the properties of calcifications which affect TAVI valves. This method can also be used in conjunction with other integrated software to ascertain the functionality of these valves. Other imaging modalities such as multi‐detector row computed tomography (MDCT) are now widely available, which can accurately size aortic valve annuli. This may help reduce the incidence of paravalvular leaks and regurgitation which may necessitate further intervention. Structural valve degeneration (SVD) remains a key factor, with varying results from current studies. The true incidence of SVD in TAVI compared to SAVR remains unclear due to the lack of long‐term data. It is now widely accepted that both are part of the armamentarium and are not mutually exclusive. Decision making in terms of appropriate interventions should be undertaken via shared decision making involving heart teams.
Biomechanics of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implant / Nappi, F.; Singh, S. S. A.; Nappi, P.; Fiore, A.. - In: BIOENGINEERING. - ISSN 2306-5354. - 9:7(2022), p. 299. [10.3390/bioengineering9070299]
Biomechanics of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implant
Fiore A.
2022
Abstract
Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has grown exponentially within the cardiology and cardiac surgical spheres. It has now become a routine approach for treating aortic stenosis. Several concerns have been raised about TAVI in comparison to conventional surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). The primary concerns regard the longevity of the valves. Several factors have been identified which may predict poor outcomes following TAVI. To this end, the lesser‐used finite element analysis (FEA) was used to quantify the properties of calcifications which affect TAVI valves. This method can also be used in conjunction with other integrated software to ascertain the functionality of these valves. Other imaging modalities such as multi‐detector row computed tomography (MDCT) are now widely available, which can accurately size aortic valve annuli. This may help reduce the incidence of paravalvular leaks and regurgitation which may necessitate further intervention. Structural valve degeneration (SVD) remains a key factor, with varying results from current studies. The true incidence of SVD in TAVI compared to SAVR remains unclear due to the lack of long‐term data. It is now widely accepted that both are part of the armamentarium and are not mutually exclusive. Decision making in terms of appropriate interventions should be undertaken via shared decision making involving heart teams.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.