Advertisement

TAVI: A European Perspective

  • Leanne HarlingEmail author
  • Andrew Chukwuemeka
Chapter

Abstract

In 2002 the first transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) was performed in Europe. Since this time, TAVI has become increasingly utilised both across Europe and worldwide. With the early trials now reporting encouraging mid- to late-term results, TAVI has become a cost-effective alternative in high-risk patients not amenable to open surgery. Indeed, these indications look likely to become further expanded into a wider range of patient groups as we gain further technical familiarity alongside the development of novel generations of valve and advances in transcatheter technology. This chapter discusses the evolution of TAVI in Europe, summarising the route leading up to its incorporation into routine clinical practice and the potential for future development.

Keywords

Balloon valvotomy TAVI Transfemoral Transapical Cost-effectiveness Valve-in-valve 

References

  1. 1.
    Berland J, Cribier A, Savin T, Lefebvre E, Koning R, Letac B. Percutaneous balloon valvuloplasty in patients with severe aortic stenosis and low ejection fraction. Immediate results and 1-year follow-up. Circulation. 1989;79:1189–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cribier A, Savin T, Saoudi N, Rocha P, Berland J, Letac B. Percutaneous transluminal valvuloplasty of acquired aortic stenosis in elderly patients: an alternative to valve replacement? Lancet. 1986;1:63–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cribier A, Eltchaninoff H, Bash A, Borenstein N, Tron C, Bauer F, et al. Percutaneous transcatheter implantation of an aortic valve prosthesis for calcific aortic stenosis: first human case description. Circulation. 2002;106:3006–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cribier A, Eltchaninoff H, Tron C, Bauer F, Agatiello C, Sebagh L, et al. Early experience with percutaneous transcatheter implantation of heart valve prosthesis for the treatment of end-stage inoperable patients with calcific aortic stenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004;43:698–703.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cribier A, Eltchaninoff H, Tron C. First human transcatheter implantation of an aortic valve prosthesis in a case of severe calcific aortic stenosis. Ann Cardiol Angeiol (Paris). 2003;52:173–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cribier A, Eltchaninoff H, Tron C, Bauer F, Agatiello C, Nercolini D, et al. Treatment of calcific aortic stenosis with the percutaneous heart valve: mid-term follow-up from the initial feasibility studies: the French experience. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;47:1214–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Edwards_Lifesciences. Edwards Lifesciences to Acquire Percutaneous Valve Technologies, Inc. for $125 Million. http://www.edwards.com/newsroom/Pages/nr20031215.aspx.
  8. 8.
    Grube E, Laborde JC, Gerckens U, Felderhoff T, Sauren B, Buellesfeld L et al. Percutaneous implantation of the CoreValve self-expanding valve prosthesis in high-risk patients with aortic valve disease: the Siegburg first-in-man study. Circulation 2006;114:1616–1624.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Grube E, Laborde JC, Zickmann B, Gerckens U, Felderhoff T, Sauren B, et al. First report on a human percutaneous transluminal implantation of a self-expanding valve prosthesis for interventional treatment of aortic valve stenosis. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2005;66:465–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Joint Task Force on the Management of Valvular Heart Disease of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC); European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS), Vahanian A, Alfieri O, Andreotti F, Antunes MJ, Baron-Esquivias G, et al. Guidelines on the management of valvular heart disease (version 2012). Eur Heart J. 2012;33:2451–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    van Mieghem NM, Head SJ, van der Boon RM, Piazza N, de Jaegere PP, Carrel T, et al. The SURTAVI model: proposal for a pragmatic risk stratification for patients with severe aortic stenosis. EuroIntervention. 2012;8:258–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    NICE. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation for aortic stenosis. NICE interventional procedure guideline [IPG421]; 2012. https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ipg421.
  13. 13.
    Mylotte D, Osnabrugge RL, Windecker S, Lefevre T, de Jaegere P, Jeger R, et al. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in Europe: adoption trends and factors influencing device utilization. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;62:210–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Schymik G, Lefevre T, Bartorelli AL, Rubino P, Treede H, Walther T, et al. European experience with the second-generation edwards SAPIEN XT transcatheter heart valve in patients with severe aortic stenosis: 1-year outcomes from the SOURCE XT registry. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;8:657–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ludman PF, Moat N, de Belder MA, Blackman DJ, Duncan A, Banya W, et al. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation in the United Kingdom: temporal trends, predictors of outcome, and 6-year follow-up: a report from the UK Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (TAVI) Registry, 2007 to 2012. Circulation. 2015;131:1181–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Beckmann A, Hamm C, Figulla HR, Cremer J, Kuck KH, Lange R, et al. The German Aortic Valve Registry (GARY): a nationwide registry for patients undergoing invasive therapy for severe aortic valve stenosis. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2012;60:319–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hamm CW, Mollmann H, Holzhey D, Beckmann A, Veit C, Figulla HR, et al. The German Aortic Valve Registry (GARY): in-hospital outcome. Eur Heart J. 2014;35:1588–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Leon MB, Smith CR, Mack M, Miller DC, Moses JW, Svensson LG, et al. Transcatheter aortic-valve implantation for aortic stenosis in patients who cannot undergo surgery. N Engl J Med. 2010;363:1597–607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Smith CR, Leon MB, Mack MJ, Miller DC, Moses JW, Svensson LG, et al. Transcatheter versus surgical aortic-valve replacement in high-risk patients. N Engl J Med. 2011;364:2187–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Fairbairn TA, Meads DM, Hulme C, Mather AN, Plein S, Blackman DJ, et al. The cost-effectiveness of transcatheter aortic valve implantation versus surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with severe aortic stenosis at high operative risk. Heart. 2013;99:914–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Watt M, Mealing S, Eaton J, Piazza N, Moat N, Brasseur P, et al. Cost-effectiveness of transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients ineligible for conventional aortic valve replacement. Heart. 2012;98:370–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    van Baal P. Important cost categories not included: transcatheter aortic valve implantation probably less cost-effective. Heart. 2012;98:1182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    NICE. Transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation for aortic bioprosthetic valve dysfunction. NICE interventional procedure guideline [IPG504]; 2014. https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ipg504/chapter/1-recommendations.
  24. 24.
    Piazza N, Kalesan B, van Mieghem N, Head S, Wenaweser P, Carrel TP, et al. A 3-center comparison of 1-year mortality outcomes between transcatheter aortic valve implantation and surgical aortic valve replacement on the basis of propensity score matching among intermediate-risk surgical patients. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2013;6:443–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Austria, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The Department of Cardiothoracic SurgeryHammersmith Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS TrustLondonUK
  2. 2.The Department of Surgery and CancerImperial College LondonLondonUK
  3. 3.National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations