You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Cardiology
Valve-in-Valve-in-Valve
  1. Selma Tosca Cook,
  2. Mario Togni,
  3. Patrice Denervaud and
  4. Stephane Cook
  1. Cardiology, University of Fribourg, Fribourg, Switzerland
  1. Correspondence to Dr Stephane Cook; Stephane.cook{at}unifr.ch

Abstract

In the case of the degeneration of surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR), the transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has become the standard. However, these valves are also susceptible to deterioration. In such instances, a new TAVI implantation may be considered. We present the case of a patient with a SAVR who underwent two TAVI procedures, spaced 8 years apart. We discuss important practical aspects, including the risk of coronary obstruction and the final valve diameter.

  • Valvar diseases
  • Interventional cardiology

https://doi.org/10.1136/bcr-2024-260437

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Contributors The following authors were responsible for drafting of the text, sourcing and editing of clinical images, investigation results, drawing original diagrams and algorithms, and critical revision for important intellectual content: STC, MT, PD and SC. The following authors gave final approval of the manuscript: SC.

    • Funding The authors would like to thank the patient and her family for making it possible to present this case, as well as the support of the Fonds Scientifique, Fribourg.

    • Case reports provide a valuable learning resource for the scientific community and can indicate areas of interest for future research. They should not be used in isolation to guide treatment choices or public health policy.

    • Competing interests PD is employed by Edwards lifesciences. The other authors have no potential conflicts to declare.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.