Eyal R. Nachum MD, Ehud Raanani MD, Amit Segev MD, Victor Guetta MD, Ilan Hai MD, Amihai Shinfeld MD, Paul Fefer MD, Hamdan Ashraf MD, Israel Barabash MD, Amjad Shalabi MD and Dan Spiegelstein MD
Background: The rate of mitral bioprosthesis implantation in clinical practice is increasing. Transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation has been described for high risk patients requiring redo valve surgery.
Objectives: To report our experience with transapical valve-in-valve implantation for failed mitral bioprosthesis.
Methods: Since 2010, 10 patients have undergone transapical valve-in-valve implantation for failed bioprosthesis in our center. Aortic valve-in-valve implantation was performed in one of them and mitral valve-in-valve implantation in nine. Mean age was 82 ± 4 years and 6 were female (67%). Mean time from original mitral valve (MV) replacement to valve-in-valve procedure was 10.5 ± 3.7 years. Follow-up was completed by all patients with a mean duration of 13 ± 12 months.
Results: Preoperatively, all patients presented with significant mitral regurgitation; two with mitral stenosis due to structural valve failure. All nine patients underwent successful transapical valve-in-valve implantation with an Edwards Sapien™ balloon expandable valve. There was no in-hospital mortality. Mean and median hospital duration was 15 ± 18 and 7 days respectively. Valve implantation was successful in all patients and there were no major complications, except for major femoral access bleeding in one patient. At last follow-up, all patients were alive and in NYHA functional class I or II. Echocardiography follow-up demonstrated that mitral regurgitation was absent or trivial in seven patients and mild in two. At follow-up, peak and mean gradients changed from 26 ± 4 and 8 ± 2 at baseline to 16.7 ± 3 and 7.3 ± 1.5, respectively.
Conclusions: Transcatheter transapical mitral valve-in-valve implantation for failed bioprosthesis is feasible in selected high risk patients. Our early experience with this strategy is encouraging. Larger randomized trials with long-term clinical and echocardiographic follow-up are recommended.
Etty Daniel-Spiegel MD, Micha Mandel PhD, Daniel Nevo MA, Avraham Ben-Chetrit MD, Ori Shen MD, Eliezer Shalev MD and Simcha Yagel MD
Background: Selection of appropriate reference charts for fetal biometry is mandatory to ensure an accurate diagnosis. Most hospitals and clinics in Israel use growth curves from the United States. Charts developed in different populations do not perform well in the Israeli population.
Objectives: To construct new reference charts for fetal biparietal diameter (BPD), head circumference (HC), abdominal circumference (AC) and femur length (FL), using a large sample of fetuses examined at 14–42 weeks gestational age in a medical center and a community ultrasound unit located in two different regions of Israel.
Methods: Data from the medical center and the community clinic were pooled. The mean and standard error of each measure for each week was calculated. Based on these, reference charts were calculated using quantiles of the normal distribution. The performance of the reference charts was assessed by comparing the new values to empirical quantiles.
Results: Biometric measurements were obtained for 79,328 fetuses. Growth charts were established based on these measurements. The overall performance of the curves was very good, with only a few exceptions among the higher quantiles in the third trimester in the medical center subsample.
Conclusions: We present new local reference charts for fetal biometry, derived from a large and minimally selected Israeli population. We suggest using these new charts in routine daily obstetric practice.