Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2022 Aug 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2020 Jan 12;162(2):539–547.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2019.11.139

Table 1.

Patient demographics

Variables Entire cohort (n=17)
Age 73.0 ± 9.28
Female 6 (35.5)
Hypertension 14 (82.4)
Hyperlipidemia 13 (76.5)
Diabetes 4 (23.5)
Chronic kidney disease 9 (52.9)
   Dialysis 2 (11.8)
COPD 2 (11.8)
Porcelain aorta 5 (29.4)
Left ventricular ejection fraction Permanent pacemaker 44.7 ± 15.9 6 (35.3)
BMI 28.0 ± 25.8
BSA 1.95 ± 0.19
NYHA Functional Classification at original TAVR
   1 0
   2 3 (17.6)
   3 11 (64.7)
   4 3 (17.6)
Etiology
 Degenerative aortic stenosis 13 (76.4)
 Rheumatic 1 (5.9)
 Aortic root aneurysm 2 (11.8)
 Radiation-induced 1 (5.9)
 Bicuspid valve 3 (17.6)
Previous cardiac surgery 8 (47.1)
  Redo sternotomy
     Isolated AVR 2 (11.8)
     Aortic root + ascending 3 (17.6)
     AVR + CABG 1 (5.9)
     Direct aortic TAVR 1 (5.9)
  Re-redo sternotomy
     AVR followed by AVR + ascending 1 (5.9)
Valve-in-valve TAVR 7 (41.2)
  Recipient surgical valve
     Freestyle 4 (57.1)
     Perimount 1 (14.3)
     Mosaic 1 (14.3)
     Homograft 1 (14.3)
STS-PROM at original TAVR 3.5 (2.6-4.9)
     With incremental factors 8.7 (5.2-13.4)
Risk Classification at original TAVR
  Extreme risk 3 (17.7)
  High risk 7 (41.2)
  Moderate risk 7 (41.2)

COPD, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; BMI, body mass index; BSA, body surface area; STS-PROM, Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality; CABG, coronary artery bypass grafting; TAVR, transcatheter aortic valve replacement; AVR, aortic valve replacement; NYHA, New York Heart Association