Vol 82, No 7-8 (2024)
Clinical vignette
Published online: 2024-07-05

open access

Page views 252
Article views/downloads 176
Get Citation

Connect on Social Media

Connect on Social Media

Zero-contrast TAVI: Novel alternative for challenging patient population

Łukasz Pyka1, Krzysztof Wilczek1, Anna Kwiecień2, Tomasz Niklewski2, Tomasz Hrapkowicz2, Mariusz Gąsior1
Pubmed: 38973442
Pol Heart J 2024;82(7-8):814-815.

Abstract

Not available

CLINICAL VIGNETTE

Zero-contrast TAVI: Novel alternative for challenging patient population

Łukasz Pyka1Krzysztof Wilczek1Anna Kwiecień2Tomasz Niklewski2Tomasz Hrapkowicz2Mariusz Gąsior1
13rd Department of Cardiology, Faculty of Medical Sciences in Zabrze, Medical University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland
2Department of Cardiac Surgery, Transplantology and Vascular Surgery, Faculty of Medical Sciences in Zabrze, Medical University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland

Correspondence to:

Łukasz Pyka, MD, PhD,

3rd Department of Cardiology,

Silesian Center for Heart Diseases,

Faculty of Medicine in Zabrze,

Medical University of Silesia,

Skłodowskiej-Curie 9, 41–800 Zabrze, Poland,

phone: +48 32 373 38 60,

e-mail: l.t.pyka@gmail.com

Copyright by the Author(s), 2024

DOI: 10.33963/v.phj.101283

Received: March 24, 2024

Accepted: June 24, 2024

Early publication date: July 5, 2024

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is the current state-of-the-art method of trea­- ting severe aortic stenosis in high-risk patients, as well as a viable alternative for certain medium- and low-risk patients [1, 2]. Preparation of the procedure requires a computed tomography (CT) angiogram of the aorta and, usually, coronary angiography. The procedure itself is contrast-guided. In this high-risk population, a significant percentage of patients suffer from chronic kidney disease [3] which has been shown to be the most important risk factor for contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN), leading to significantly impaired outcomes [4]. Studies have shown that in TAVI patients with chronic kidney disease or at risk of CIN, zero-contrast TAVI procedures may be a viable option [5].

A 70-year-old man with a left ventricular ejection fraction of 25%, severe aortic stenosis with an area of 0.8 mm2, and a mean gradient of 41 mm Hg, was admitted to our institution. The patient had had coronary artery bypass grafting 10 years previously, plus a recently implanted cardioverter-defibrillator. During initial assessment before TAVI in another center, a coronary angiography was performed, showing multivessel coronary artery disease with patent LIMA and venous grafts with no indication for further revascularization. Subsequently, CIN occurred and a persistent decrease of eGFR to 2023 ml/min/1.73 m2 was observed. Therefore, we decided to perform a zero-contrast TAVI procedure.

Assessment of the access site performed with Doppler ultrasound showed no significant lesions. Next, a non-contrast CT revealed relatively straightforward femoral access with limited calcifications (Supplementary material, Figure S1). We considered nuclear magnetic resonance imaging (NMR), but due to the satisfactory CT and Doppler images we decided to confine NMR to the heart and ascending aorta. A normal three cusp anatomy was confirmed in CT, NMR and echocardiography (Supplementary material, Figure S2). Aortic angulation, coronary ostia heights and selection of implant view were based on non-contrast CT (Supplementary material, Figure S3). The quantification of aortic valve annulus was challenging, as some discrepancies were present in the utilized modalities (3D transeso­phageal echocardio­graphy [TEE] 2425 mm; CT 23.5 mm; NMR 26 mm). Nonetheless, all of the measurements were within the size of a 26 mm Edwards Sapien S3 Ultra valve (Supplementary material, Figure S4).

For the procedure, the patient was under general anesthesia. Right femoral access with surgical cutdown was utilized in order to optimize access site management. The procedure was under permanent TEE control. A pigtail catheter was introduced to the non-coronary cusp via radial access. Crossing of the valve and introduction of an extra-stiff Confida guidewire was performed. Finally, an AL 1.0 catheter with a protruding wire was introduced to the left coronary cusp from left femoral access (Supplementary material, Figure S5). A balloon valvuloplasty was performed with a 25 × 40 mm valvuloplasty balloon. A notch during inflation was observed on the balloon, which in our opinion confirmed correct zero-contrast sizing of the annulus (Supplementary material, Figure S6). Valve positioning and implantation were guided by the location of catheters in coronary cusps (Supplementary material, Video S1). A final echo showed an optimal TAVI result, with no paravalvular leak and a mean gradient of 7 mm Hg. The patient was discharged after three days of uncomplicated hospital stay.

At three-month follow-up, the patient remains asymptomatic (New York Heart Association Class I, Canadian Cardiovascular Society Class I), with stable renal function. We suggest that zero-contrast TAVI may be a viable treatment option in these extremely complicated patients.

Figure 1. Main aspects of zero-contrast TAVI preparation and execution. A. Non-contrast CT for assessment of access site calcification. B. Transesophageal 3D echocardiogram, non-contrast enhance cardiac NMR and non-contrast CT for assessment of valve anatomy and annulus size calculation. C. Balloon valvuloplasty with a visible notch on the balloon suggesting proper sizing of the valve. D. TAVI zero contrast valve positioning and implantation based on location of catheters in non coronary and left coronary cusps
Abbreviations: CT, computed tomography; NMR, nuclear magnetic resonance imaging; TAVI, transcatheter aortic valve implantation
Supplementary material

Supplementary material is available at https://journals.viamedica.pl/polish_heart_journal.

Article information

Conflict of interest: None declared.

Funding: None.

Open access: This article is available in open access under Creative Common Attribution-Non-Commercial-No Derivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) license, which allows downloading and sharing articles with others as long as they credit the authors and the publisher, but without permission to change them in any way or use them commercially. For commercial use, please contact the journal office at polishheartjournal@ptkardio.pl

REFERENCES

  1. Mack MJ, Leon MB, Smith CR, et al. PARTNER 1 trial investigators. 5-year outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement or surgical aortic valve replacement for high surgical risk patients with aortic stenosis (PARTNER 1): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2015; 385(9986): 24772484, doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)60308-7, indexed in Pub­med: 25788234.
  2. Galper BZ, Chinnakondepalli KM, Wang K, et al. PARTNER Investigators. Economic Outcomes of Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients with Severe Aortic Stenosis and Low Surgical Risk: Results from the PARTNER 3 Trial. Circulation. 2023; 147(21): 15941605, doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.122.062481, indexed in Pubmed: 37154049.
  3. Carroll JD, Mack MJ, Vemulapalli S, et al. STS-ACC TVT Registry of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020; 76(21): 24922516, doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2020.09.595, indexed in Pubmed: 33213729.
  4. Jäckel M, Keller S, Prager EP, et al. The impact of transcatheter aortic valve implantation planning and procedure on acute and chronic renal failure. Cardiol J. 2023; 30(2): 247255, doi: 10.5603/CJ.a2021.0057, indexed in Pubmed: 34312832.
  5. Freire AF, Nicz PF, Ribeiro HB, et al. Non-contrast transcatheter aortic valve implantation for patients with aortic stenosis and chronic kidney disease: A pilot study. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2023; 10: 1175600, doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2023.1175600, indexed in Pubmed: 37388643.