English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The aim of this study was to determine the influence of an elliptic annulus on acute device success rates following self-expanding (SE) transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) vs. balloon-expandable (BE) TAVR.Methods and Results:Outcomes were assessed using Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 definitions. Aortic annulus ratio (AAR) was measured as short axis diameter/long axis diameter. Mean AAR was 0.81±0.06. Patients were therefore divided into 2 groups: AAR &lt;0.82 and AAR ≥0.82. For circular annuli (AAR ≥0.82; 363 patients), high device success rates were achieved in both valve groups (SE valve, 90.5% vs. BE valve, 95.0%, P=0.14). Conversely, for AAR &lt;0.82 (374 patients), SE valves had lower device success rates than BE valves (82.5% vs. 95.3%, P=0.002). For elliptic annuli, SE-TAVR was an independent predictor of unsuccessful device implantation (OR, 6.34, P&lt;0.001). Nonetheless, increased oversizing of SE valves for elliptic annuli was associated with an exponential rise in device success (threshold ≥17.5%; area under the curve, 0.83) but not for BE-TAVR. Furthermore, optimally oversized SE valves and BE valves had a similarly high device success for elliptic annuli (SE valve, 96.2% vs. BE valve, 95.3%).

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement With Different Valve Types in Elliptic Aortic Annuli