Characteristics of Surgical Prosthetic Heart Valves and Problems Around Labelling: A Document From the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS)-The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS)-American Association for Thoracic Surgery (AATS) Valve Labelling Task Force.
Durko, Andras P.; Head, Stuart J.; Pibarot, Philippeet al.
2019 • In The Annals of thoracic surgery, 108 (1), p. 292-303
[en] Intraoperative surgical prosthetic heart valve (SHV) choice is a key determinant of successful surgery and positive postoperative outcomes. Currently, many controversies exist around the sizing and labelling of SHVs rendering the comparison of different valves difficult. To explore solutions, an expert Valve Labelling Task Force was jointly initiated by the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS), The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) and the American Association for Thoracic Surgery (AATS). The EACTS-STS-AATS Valve Labelling Task Force, comprising cardiac surgeons, cardiologists, engineers, regulators and representatives from the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and major valve manufacturers, held its first in-person meeting in February 2018 in Paris, France. This article was derived from the meeting's discussions. The Task Force identified the following areas for improvement and clarification: reporting of physical dimensions and characteristics of SHVs determining and labelling of SHV size, in vivo and in vitro testing and reporting of SHV hemodynamic performance and thrombogenicity. Furthermore, a thorough understanding of the regulatory background and the role of the applicable ISO standards, together with close cooperation between all stakeholders (including regulatory and standard-setting bodies), is necessary to improve the current situation. Cardiac surgeons should be provided with appropriate information to allow for optimal SHV choice. This first article from the EACTS-STS-AATS Valve Labelling Task Force summarizes the background of SHV sizing and labelling and identifies the most important elements where further standardization is necessary.
Disciplines :
Cardiovascular & respiratory systems
Author, co-author :
Durko, Andras P.
Head, Stuart J.
Pibarot, Philippe
Atluri, Pavan
Bapat, Vinayak
Cameron, Duke E.
Casselman, Filip P. A.
Chen, Edward P.
Dahle, Gry
Ebels, Tjark
Elefteriades, John A.
Lancellotti, Patrizio ; Université de Liège - ULiège > Département des sciences cliniques > Cardiologie - Pathologie spéciale et réhabilitation
Characteristics of Surgical Prosthetic Heart Valves and Problems Around Labelling: A Document From the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS)-The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS)-American Association for Thoracic Surgery (AATS) Valve Labelling Task Force.
Publication date :
2019
Journal title :
The Annals of thoracic surgery
ISSN :
0003-4975
eISSN :
1552-6259
Volume :
108
Issue :
1
Pages :
292-303
Peer reviewed :
Peer reviewed
Commentary :
Copyright (c) 2019 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons, The American Association for Thoracic Surgery, and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Head, S.J., Mokhles, M.M., Osnabrugge, R.L., Pibarot, P., Mack, M.J., Takkenberg, J.J., et al. The impact of prosthesis-patient mismatch on long-term survival after aortic valve replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 34 observational studies comprising 27 186 patients with 133 141 patient-years. Eur Heart J 33 (2012), 1518–1529.
ISO. International Standard, ISO 5840:2015. Cardiovascular Implants—Cardiac Valve Prostheses. International Organization for Standardization (ISO), 2015. Available at www.iso.org. (Accessed 3 April 2018)
Doenst, T., Amorim, P.A., Al-Alam, N., Lehmann, S., Mukherjee, C., Faerber, G., Where is the common sense in aortic valve replacement? A review of hemodynamics and sizing of stented tissue valves. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 142 (2011), 1180–1187.
ISO. ISO—International Organization for Standardization. Available at https://www.iso.org/home.html, 2018. (Accessed 14 March 2018)
Wu, Y., Butchart, E.G., Borer, J.S., Yoganathan, A., Grunkemeier, G.L., Clinical evaluation of new heart valve prostheses: update of objective performance criteria. Ann Thorac Surg 98 (2014), 1865–1874.
Head, S.J., Mylotte, D., Mack, M.J., Piazza, N., van Mieghem, N.M., Leon, M.B., et al. Considerations and recommendations for the introduction of objective performance criteria for transcatheter aortic heart valve device approval. Circulation 133 (2016), 2086–2093.
The Council of the European Communities, Council Directive 93/42/EEC. Available at http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CONSLEG:1993L0042:20071011:en:PDF. (Accessed 3 April 2018)
The European Parliament and the Council of the European Union, Regulation (EU) 2017/745. Available at http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/ENG/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32017R0745&from=EN. (Accessed 3 April 2018)
International Organization for Standardization (ISO), European Committee for Standardization (CEN). Agreement on Technical Co-operation between ISO and CEN (Vienna Agreement). Available at https://boss.cen.eu/ref/Vienna_Agreement.pdf, 2001. (Accessed 3 April 2018)
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. FDA Organization. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Available at https://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/CentersOffices/default.htm, 2018. (Accessed 3 April 2018)
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Premarket Approval (PMA): U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Available at https://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuidance/HowtoMarketYourDevice/PremarketSubmissions/PremarketApprovalPMA/ucm2007514.htm#data, 2018. (Accessed 3 April 2018)
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Recognition and Use of Consensus Standards, Guidance for Industry and FDA Staff. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Available at https://www.fda.gov/downloads/medicaldevices/deviceregulationandguidance/guidancedocuments/ucm077295.pdf, 2007. (Accessed 3 April 2018)
Mohammadi, H., Mequanint, K., Prosthetic aortic heart valves: modeling and design. Med Eng Phys 33 (2011), 131–147.
Konakci, K.Z., Bohle, B., Blumer, R., Hoetzenecker, W., Roth, G., Moser, B., et al. Alpha-Gal on bioprostheses: xenograft immune response in cardiac surgery. Eur J Clin Invest 35 (2005), 17–23.
Flameng, W., Rega, F., Vercalsteren, M., Herijgers, P., Meuris, B., Antimineralization treatment and patient-prosthesis mismatch are major determinants of the onset and incidence of structural valve degeneration in bioprosthetic heart valves. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 147 (2014), 1219–1224.
Scherman, J., Bezuidenhout, D., Ofoegbu, C., Williams, D.F., Zilla, P., TAVI for low to middle income countries. Eur Heart J 38 (2017), 1182–1184.
Bezuidenhout, D., Williams, D.F., Zilla, P., Polymeric heart valves for surgical implantation, catheter-based technologies and heart assist devices. Biomaterials 36 (2015), 6–25.
Glaser, N., Jackson, V., Franco-Cereceda, A., Sartipy, U., Survival after aortic valve replacement with bovine or porcine valve prostheses: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg, 2018 May 17 [Epub ahead of print].
Hickey, G.L., Bridgewater, B., Grant, S.W., Deanfield, J., Parkinson, J., Bryan, A.J., et al. National registry data and record linkage to inform postmarket surveillance of prosthetic aortic valve models over 15 Years. JAMA Intern Med 177 (2017), 79–86.
Allen, K.B., Chhatriwalla, A.K., Cohen, D.J., Saxon, J.T., Aggarwal, S., Hart, A., et al. Bioprosthetic valve fracture to facilitate transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation. Ann Thorac Surg 104 (2017), 1501–1508.
Bapat, V., Mydin, I., Chadalavada, S., Tehrani, H., Attia, R., Thomas, M., A guide to fluoroscopic identification and design of bioprosthetic valves: a reference for valve-in-valve procedure. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 81 (2013), 853–861.
Bapat, V.N., Attia, R., Thomas, M., Effect of valve design on the stent internal diameter of a bioprosthetic valve: a concept of true internal diameter and its implications for the valve-in-valve procedure. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 7 (2014), 115–127.
Cevasco, M., Mick, S.L., Kwon, M., Lee, L.S., Chen, E.P., Chen, F.Y., True external diameter better predicts hemodynamic performance of bioprosthetic aortic valves than the manufacturers' stated size. J Heart Valve Dis 22 (2013), 377–382.
Ruzicka, D.J., Hettich, I., Hutter, A., Bleiziffer, S., Badiu, C.C., Bauernschmitt, R., et al. The complete supraannular concept: in vivo hemodynamics of bovine and porcine aortic bioprostheses. Circulation 120 (2009), S139–S145.
Tabata, M., Shibayama, K., Watanabe, H., Sato, Y., Fukui, T., Takanashi, S., Simple interrupted suturing increases valve performance after aortic valve replacement with a small supra-annular bioprosthesis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 147 (2014), 321–325.
Cameron, D., Little things matter. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 149 (2015), 918–919.
Christakis, G.T., Buth, K.J., Goldman, B.S., Fremes, S.E., Rao, V., Cohen, G., et al. Inaccurate and misleading valve sizing: a proposed standard for valve size nomenclature. Ann Thorac Surg 66 (1998), 1198–1203.
Ruzicka, D.J., Eichinger, W.B., Hettich, I.M., Bleiziffer, S., Bauernschmitt, R., Lange, R., Hemodynamic performance of the new St. Jude Medical Epic Supra porcine bioprosthesis in comparison to the Medtronic Mosaic on the basis of patient annulus diameter. J Heart Valve Dis 17 (2008), 426–433 discussion 34.
Walther, T., Falk, V., Weigl, C., Diegeler, A., Rauch, T., Autschbach, R., et al. Discrepancy of sizers for conventional and stentless aortic valve implants. J Heart Valve Dis 6 (1997), 145–148.
Bartels, C., Leyh, R.G., Matthias Bechtel, J.F., Joubert-Hubner, E., Sievers, H.H., Discrepancies between sizer and valve dimensions: implications for small aortic root. Ann Thorac Surg 65 (1998), 1631–1633.
Retta, S.M., Kepner, J., Marquez, S., Herman, B.A., S Shu MC, Grossman, L.W., In-vitro pulsatile flow measurement in prosthetic heart valves: an inter-laboratory comparison. J Heart Valve Dis 26 (2017), 72–80.
Lancellotti, P., Pibarot, P., Chambers, J., Edvardsen, T., Delgado, V., Dulgheru, R., et al. Recommendations for the imaging assessment of prosthetic heart valves: a report from the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging endorsed by the Chinese Society of Echocardiography, the Inter-American Society of Echocardiography and the Brazilian Department of Cardiovascular Imaging. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging 17 (2016), 589–590.
Zoghbi, W.A., Chambers, J.B., Dumesnil, J.G., Foster, E., Gottdiener, J.S., Grayburn, P.A., et al. Recommendations for evaluation of prosthetic valves with echocardiography and Doppler ultrasound: a report from the American Society of Echocardiography's Guidelines and Standards Committee and the Task Force on Prosthetic Valves, developed in conjunction with the American College of Cardiology Cardiovascular Imaging Committee, Cardiac Imaging Committee of the American Heart Association, the European Association of Echocardiography, a registered branch of the European Society of Cardiology, the Japanese Society of Echocardiography and the Canadian Society of Echocardiography, endorsed by the American College of Cardiology Foundation, American Heart Association, European Association of Echocardiography, a registered branch of the European Society of Cardiology, the Japanese Society of Echocardiography, and Canadian Society of Echocardiography. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 22 (2009), 975–1014.
Gaspar, T., Adawi, S., Sachner, R., Asmer, I., Ganaeem, M., Rubinshtein, R., et al. Three-dimensional imaging of the left ventricular outflow tract: impact on aortic valve area estimation by the continuity equation. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 25 (2012), 749–757.
Kamperidis, V., van Rosendael, P.J., Katsanos, S., van der Kley, F., Regeer, M., Al Amri, I., et al. Low gradient severe aortic stenosis with preserved ejection fraction: reclassification of severity by fusion of Doppler and computed tomographic data. Eur Heart J 36 (2015), 2087–2096.
Mooney, J., Sellers, S.L., Blanke, P., Pibarot, P., Hahn, R.T., Dvir, D., et al. CT-defined prosthesis-patient mismatch downgrades frequency and severity, and demonstrates no association with adverse outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 10 (2017), 1578–1587.
Clavel, M.A., Malouf, J., Messika-Zeitoun, D., Araoz, P.A., Michelena, H.I., Enriquez-Sarano, M., Aortic valve area calculation in aortic stenosis by CT and Doppler echocardiography. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 8 (2015), 248–257.
Hahn, R.T., Leipsic, J., Douglas, P.S., Jaber, W.A., Weissman, N.J., Pibarot, P., et al. Comprehensive echocardiographic assessment of normal transcatheter valve function. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging, 2018.
Pibarot, P., Garcia, D., Dumesnil, J.G., Energy loss index in aortic stenosis: from fluid mechanics concept to clinical application. Circulation 127 (2013), 1101–1104.
Evin, M., Pibarot, P., Guivier-Curien, C., Tanne, D., Kadem, L., Rieu, R., Localized transvalvular pressure gradients in mitral bileaflet mechanical heart valves and impact on gradient overestimation by Doppler. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 26 (2013), 791–800.
Pibarot, P., Hahn, R.T., Weissman, N.J., Monaghan, M.J., Assessment of paravalvular regurgitation following TAVR: a proposal of unifying grading scheme. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 8 (2015), 340–360.
Fattouch, K., Lancellotti, P., Vannan, M.A., Speziale, G., (eds.) Advances in Treatments for Aortic Valve and Root Diseases, 1st ed., 2018, Springer International Publishing, Cham, Switzerland.
Ribeiro, H.B., Orwat, S., Hayek, S.S., Larose, É., Babaliaros, V., Dahou, A., et al. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance to evaluate aortic regurgitation after transcatheter aortic valve replacement. J Am Coll Cardiol 68 (2016), 577–585.
Mohty, D., Dumesnil, J.G., Echahidi, N., Mathieu, P., Dagenais, F., Voisine, P., et al. Impact of prosthesis-patient mismatch on long-term survival after aortic valve replacement: influence of age, obesity, and left ventricular dysfunction. J Am Coll Cardiol 53 (2009), 39–47.
Dayan, V., Vignolo, G., Soca, G., Paganini, J.J., Brusich, D., Pibarot, P., Predictors and outcomes of prosthesis-patient mismatch after aortic valve replacement. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 9 (2016), 924–933.
Head, S.J., Celik, M., Kappetein, A.P., Mechanical versus bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement. Eur Heart J 38 (2017), 2183–2191.
Fallon, J.M., DeSimone, J.P., Brennan, J.M., O'Brien, S., Thibault, D.P., DiScipio, A.W., et al. The incidence and consequence of prosthesis-patient mismatch after surgical aortic valve replacement. Ann Thorac Surg 106 (2018), 14–22.
Johnston, D.R., Soltesz, E.G., Vakil, N., Rajeswaran, J., Roselli, E.E., Sabik, J.F. 3rd, et al. Long-term durability of bioprosthetic aortic valves: implications from 12,569 implants. Ann Thorac Surg 99 (2015), 1239–1247.
Bleiziffer, S., Eichinger, W.B., Hettich, I., Guenzinger, R., Ruzicka, D., Bauernschmitt, R., et al. Prediction of valve prosthesis-patient mismatch prior to aortic valve replacement: which is the best method?. Heart 93 (2007), 615–620.
Falk, V., Baumgartner, H., Bax, J.J., De Bonis, M., Hamm, C., Holm, P.J., et al. 2017 ESC/EACTS Guidelines for the management of valvular heart disease. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 52 (2017), 616–664.
Nishimura, R.A., Otto, C.M., Bonow, R.O., Carabello, B.A., Erwin, J.P. 3rd, Fleisher, L.A., et al. 2017 AHA/ACC focused update of the 2014 AHA/ACC Guideline for the management of patients with valvular heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association task force on clinical practice guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol 70 (2017), 252–289.
Eikelboom, J.W., Connolly, S.J., Brueckmann, M., Granger, C.B., Kappetein, A.P., Mack, M.J., et al. Dabigatran versus warfarin in patients with mechanical heart valves. N Engl J Med 369 (2013), 1206–1214.
Puskas, J.D., Gerdisch, M., Nichols, D., Fermin, L., Rhenman, B., Kapoor, D., et al. Anticoagulation and antiplatelet strategies after On-X mechanical aortic valve replacement. J Am Coll Cardiol 71 (2018), 2717–2726.
Koertke, H., Zittermann, A., Wagner, O., Secer, S., Sciangula, A., Saggau, W., et al. Telemedicine-guided, very low-dose international normalized ratio self-control in patients with mechanical heart valve implants. Eur Heart J 36 (2015), 1297–1305.
Torella, M., Aquila, I., Chiodini, P., Amarelli, C., Romano, G., Della Ratta, E.E., et al. Low-dose anticoagulation after isolated mechanical aortic valve replacement with Liva Nova Bicarbon prosthesis: a post hoc analysis of LOWERING-IT Trial. Sci Rep, 8, 2018, 8405.
Makkar, R.R., Fontana, G., Jilaihawi, H., Chakravarty, T., Kofoed, K.F., De Backer, O., et al. Possible subclinical leaflet thrombosis in bioprosthetic aortic valves. N Engl J Med 373 (2015), 2015–2024.
Chakravarty, T., Sondergaard, L., Friedman, J., De Backer, O., Berman, D., Kofoed, K.F., et al. Subclinical leaflet thrombosis in surgical and transcatheter bioprosthetic aortic valves: an observational study. Lancet 389 (2017), 2383–2392.
Kappetein, A.P., Head, S.J., Généreux, P., Piazza, N., van Mieghem, N.M., Blackstone, E.H., et al. Updated standardized endpoint definitions for transcatheter aortic valve implantation: the Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 consensus document. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 42 (2012), S45–S60.
