TAVR qualification?

Valve Replacement Forums

Help Support Valve Replacement Forums:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

NotHuman

Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2014
Messages
10
Location
New York, NY
I have had aortic root replacement surgery. Now I have moderate aortic regurgitation in my valve. If I ever need a TAVR, would I be eligible or does having the root replacement disqualify me?

Additionally, my resting heart rate is a little on the high side at times (fluctuates between 65-85) and am wondering if this is because of my diastolic dysfunction/leak?
 
Hi

NotHuman;n881401 said:
... If I ever need a TAVR, would I be eligible or does having the root replacement disqualify me?

Additionally, my resting heart rate is a little on the high side at times (fluctuates between 65-85) and am wondering

I can't be sure of the first, but what "is" now may not be the same story when you actually (if you ever actually) need it. Technology and techniques change over time.

As to the resting HR, my HR was higher after surgery and it took nearly 6 months post surgery of exersize and breathing control to get it back. I assume that the same will be for you. None the less (depending on your age and other factors) what you have reported is not far away from "normal"

As a conjecture the reason for the higher HR may indeed be something entirely different to your leak. During Aortic Valve Replacement surgery the surgeon cuts very close to a critical neural node.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atrioventricular_node

800px-Reizleitungssystem_1.png


So there will at the very least be scar tissue forming around that area which may produce some effect.

It is this node which can be damaged during surgery and on occasion requires the AVR patient to have a pacemaker in place.

Best Wishes with recovery
 
pellicle;n881403 said:
Hi



I can't be sure of the first, but what "is" now may not be the same story when you actually (if you ever actually) need it. Technology and techniques change over time.

As to the resting HR, my HR was higher after surgery and it took nearly 6 months post surgery of exersize and breathing control to get it back. I assume that the same will be for you. None the less (depending on your age and other factors) what you have reported is not far away from "normal"

As a conjecture the reason for the higher HR may indeed be something entirely different to your leak. During Aortic Valve Replacement surgery the surgeon cuts very close to a critical neural node.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atrioventricular_node

800px-Reizleitungssystem_1.png


So there will at the very least be scar tissue forming around that area which may produce some effect.

It is this node which can be damaged during surgery and on occasion requires the AVR patient to have a pacemaker in place.

Best Wishes with recovery

My apologies it took me so late to say thanks for the reply.
 
NotHuman;n881787 said:
My apologies it took me so late to say thanks for the reply.

no problem ... and I don't think I noticed it, but a HR of 65-80 isn't really high (and depends a lot on factors like existing fitness and age too)

Best Wishes
 
pellicle;n881792 said:
no problem ... and I don't think I noticed it, but a HR of 65-80 isn't really high (and depends a lot on factors like existing fitness and age too)

Best Wishes

The amount of fitness I do is comparable to a professional athlete, so for me, noticing a reduce exercise capacity is really an issue. I have very little bodyfat but I am large and muscular. Resting heart rate lately has been in the 60s so that is good.

I also read about a natural valve replacement option using the patient's own tissue. I can only seem to find info about it on Stanford's web site though and it might only be for the mitral valve. There is also one where they go in through the ribs and do a valve replacement
https://stanfordhealthcare.org/medic...t-surgery.html
 
NotHuman;n881814 said:
The amount of fitness I do is comparable to a professional athlete, so for me, noticing a reduce exercise capacity is really an issue.

I think its fair to say that open heart sugery is "putting your body through a lot" ... had the same "injury" been inflicted on you without all the surrounds of surgery it would quite simply be fatal.

That surgery is so good at leaveraging your bodies ability to heal is testimony to that you don't feel more like "a bus hit you". So give your body a chance to heal slowy. A good athlete also needs to know how to recover from injuries.

Glad resting rate is returning, took a few months of me too.

I also read about a natural valve replacement option using the patient's own tissue. I can only seem to find info about it on Stanford's web site though and it might only be for the mitral valve. There is also one where they go in through the ribs and do a valve replacement

I've heard of that procedure and I'm just trying to fish it out now ... I'll post back when I find it.

Make no mistake ... there is nothing any more "natural" about it than a leather calfskin wallet. The tissue is treated in a manner like leather and then cut and stitched onto places like leather. The wording of "natural" in my view suckers people into thinking its somehow better than a "bioprosthesis" ... once upon a time we made hinges out of leather, even some old cars used leather on the joint between the drive shaft and the diff ... now we use metals because they're more durable.

pardon me being blunt here.
 
my post was flagged, so (expecting that) I saved it, here it is again:
Ok, I did some digging, couldn't find the old post that I sought (perhaps I've muddled it with my brain distilling several posts and replies together).

I did find this:

https://medical.electronicspecifier....t-s-own-tissue

which has some interesting points I'll highlight then mention
Since November 2016, the Department of Cardiovascular Surgery of the German Heart Centre Munich has been pioneering a new surgical method to replace the valve.

“We learned the procedure from Professor Shigeyuki Ozaki from Japan, who developed and standardised it. In this method, a new valve is formed from the patient’s own body tissue. The approach over-comes many problems that used to bedevil the valve-replacement procedure, especially in children and young patients,” explains Professor Rüdiger Lange, Director of the Department of Cardiovascular Surgery of the German Heart Centre Munich and Professor for Cardiovascular Surgery at the Technical University of Munich (TUM).

In the conventional approach, patients receive either an artificial valve made of titanium or a biological valve from a cow or pig. However, both methods have disadvantages. In the case of the metal valve, the patient must be put on long-term anticoagulant drugs to prevent blood clots from forming on the implant. Even small wounds then become problematic for the patient, as the blood coagulates more slowly than usual.

The drawback of bovine or porcine valves is that they only have a life span of 10-15 years, after which they must be replaced. In fact, the life span can be significantly shorter in children and young adults with a congenital valve defect due to increased mechanical stress. Consequently, complicated open-heart surgery must be repeated again and again.

The researchers are confident that the valves which are reconstructed from the patient’s own tissue using the Ozaki method are much more durable. “The valve is built up on the patient’s natural valve ring".

"This means that we don’t require an artificial prosthetic ring, which is fixed and immovable. As a result, the mechanical properties of a natural heart valve are largely retained. In addition, it is no longer necessary to administer anticoagulants after the operation,” says Krane, enumerating the advantages of the new method.

In the Ozaki method, the old defective aortic valve is first completely removed, and the natural aortic valve ring is cleaned. As the human aortic valve consists of three cusps, these three elements must also be reconstructed from the patient’s pericardium, the membrane enclosing the heart.

Markus Krane re-moves a sufficiently large piece from the pericardium
, which is then used as material for the new valve. This is not a problem, as the resulting gap is covered at the end of the operation with a piece of synthetic pericardium.

Before the surgeon can use the removed pericardial tissue to reconstruct the aortic valve, it must first be treated. “The tissue is still very soft after it has been removed. In order to be able to use it as a tough, robust valve, we have to tan it by a process akin to the method used for preparing leather,” Krane explains.

As each patient has a different valve size, the surgeons measure the old valve cusps and cut new cusps from the removed piece of pericardium using a bespoke template. The new cusps are then sutured onto the natural valve ring in the patient’s heart.

Krane has already used the new method on over 40 patients – so far without any complications. The re-searchers are currently conducting a clinical trial with over a hundred patients which will run until 2019. They want to determine whether the new approach is superior to the conventional method of replacing a valve with an artificial prosthesis.

“We're trying to show how well the Ozaki method works. Perhaps more doctors around the world will then start using it,” Dr. Markus Krane says. Recently, he introduced the procedure to several Russian doctors with the result that they have now also adopted the Ozaki method.

Ok ...
  • language used, very "sales" ... Eg "bedevil"; "conventional approach both have disadvantages" (but lets not say that word about ours)
  • the drawback (of the opposition) is that they have known limited lifespans (ours has an unknown untested limited lifespan) resulting in surgeries again and again (melodrama for sure, but accurate)
  • in the conventional approach we don't use titanium in mechanical valves as far as I know, they are a compound called pyrolytic carbon which is a ceramic, but I believe they may be used in the stents of the stitching rings and supports in the biological prostheses
  • they don't have a support ring (makes you wonder why the others bothered ... would it be because they found them to be an advantage? I can only speculate this is an advantage to allow heart growth in children.
  • Ozaki tosses away the defective aortic valve and then puts in something "from you" which isn't valve material, but is pericardium ... oddly there are pericardial biological prosthetic valves already on the market (pre made to exacting standards) which seem to have no longer life spans than Porcine (pig) or Bovine (cow), and that noone really talks about them much
  • they cut out part of your pericardium, which to my knowledge is an open heart procedure. Correct me if I'm wrong but this strongly suggests 2 surgeries, one to harvest the pericardium (but you wouldn't be on the heart lung bypass) the second to put in their handiwork (where you would be on the bypass. This gives you 2 times in complex surgery, in ICU and open to hospital acquired infections twice
  • your pericardial becomes a "natural" (calf skin wallet) by being treated "akin to the method for preapring leather"
really ... you're kidding me

Only a surgeon would think this is a great idea.

I can't wait to see the stats in 20 years on reoperation rates
 
pellicle;n881834 said:
my post was flagged, so (expecting that) I saved it, here it is again:
Ok, I did some digging, couldn't find the old post that I sought (perhaps I've muddled it with my brain distilling several posts and replies together).

I did find this:

https://medical.electronicspecifier....t-s-own-tissue

which has some interesting points I'll highlight then mention


Ok ...
  • language used, very "sales" ... Eg "bedevil"; "conventional approach both have disadvantages" (but lets not say that word about ours)
  • the drawback (of the opposition) is that they have known limited lifespans (ours has an unknown untested limited lifespan) resulting in surgeries again and again (melodrama for sure, but accurate)
  • in the conventional approach we don't use titanium in mechanical valves as far as I know, they are a compound called pyrolytic carbon which is a ceramic, but I believe they may be used in the stents of the stitching rings and supports in the biological prostheses
  • they don't have a support ring (makes you wonder why the others bothered ... would it be because they found them to be an advantage? I can only speculate this is an advantage to allow heart growth in children.
  • Ozaki tosses away the defective aortic valve and then puts in something "from you" which isn't valve material, but is pericardium ... oddly there are pericardial biological prosthetic valves already on the market (pre made to exacting standards) which seem to have no longer life spans than Porcine (pig) or Bovine (cow), and that noone really talks about them much
  • they cut out part of your pericardium, which to my knowledge is an open heart procedure. Correct me if I'm wrong but this strongly suggests 2 surgeries, one to harvest the pericardium (but you wouldn't be on the heart lung bypass) the second to put in their handiwork (where you would be on the bypass. This gives you 2 times in complex surgery, in ICU and open to hospital acquired infections twice
  • your pericardial becomes a "natural" (calf skin wallet) by being treated "akin to the method for preapring leather"
really ... you're kidding me

Only a surgeon would think this is a great idea.

I can't wait to see the stats in 20 years on reoperation rates

Thanks for tracking this down and sharing it! Funny how much research I did and never stumbled upon this. You don't seem to find it very promising and you present very good reasons why. Hopefully you're wrong (lol) or hopefully something better will come along soon. I'd have no problem flying to Germany if it meant the best possible surgery.

Fortunately, I'm not at that point and actually feel a lot better today. I think anxiety played a role in my symptoms this week
 
Hi

NotHuman;n881860 said:
Thanks for tracking this down and sharing it!

Your welcome.


Hopefully you're wrong (lol) or hopefully something better will come along soon.

Something I've noticed is that people when they first discover they have a valve problem clutch at every bleeding edge crackpot snake oil to somehow avoid the good solid well documented well proven solution because they perceive it to be painful.

I think its related to the denial and bargaining stages of grief.

Best wishes with your choices

:)
 
I'd side with pellicle on this one. Yes, the concept is intriguing, but it is very early in its trial. There is no hard data comparing the life spans of these valves to any other bio-prosthetic. Also, no mention is made of the specific process. As pellicle hints, there could well be two separate and significant procedures - one to harvest pericardial tissue and the other to construct the valve. How long a time separates them? They indicate that the native pericardial tissue is treated (tanned?), but they don't indicate how long this process takes. I doubt that it is measured in minutes or hours, so I suspect that there is significant time between the two procedures.

Also, they don't mention how long the process of constructing a new valve in the native ring takes. Their patients could be spending a much longer time on the heart-lung machine than would patients receiving a pre-made valve. This could increase the likelihood of complications in and from surgery, such as "pump-head" or clotting/bleeding incidents.

Personally, I see this as a very important experimental procedure. It could, over time, lead to a revolutionary new way to treat valvular heart disease patients. I do not see it as anywhere near "ready for prime time" yet. The "cool factor" is very high -- right up there with the "risk factor." (Just my own opinion, though.)
 

Latest posts

Back
Top