The present disclosure relates to heart valve interventional systems and methods and more particularly, to mitral valve therapy systems and methods.
The long-term clinical effect of valve regurgitation is well recognized as a significant contributor to cardiovascular related morbidity and mortality. Thus, the primary goal of any therapy of the mitral valve is to significantly reduce or eliminate the regurgitation. By eliminating the regurgitation, the destructive volume overload effects on the left ventricle are attenuated. The volume overload of mitral regurgitation (MR) relates to the excessive kinetic energy required during isotonic contraction to generate overall stroke volume in an attempt to maintain forward stroke volume and cardiac output. It also relates to the pressure potential energy dissipation of the leaking valve during the most energy-consuming portion of the cardiac cycle, isovolumic contraction. Additionally, successful MR reduction should have the effect of reducing the elevated pressures in the left atrium and pulmonary vasculature reducing pulmonary edema (congestion) and shortness of breath symptomatology. It also has a positive effect on the filling profile of the left ventricle (LV) and the restrictive LV physiology that can result with MR. These pathophysiologic issues indicate the potential benefits of MR therapy, but also indicates the complexity of the system and the need for a therapy to focus beyond the MR level or grade.
It is also desirable to prevent new deleterious physiology or function of the valve. The procedure and system used to fix the mitral valve ideally should avoid worsening other (non-MR) existing pathologic conditions or creating new pathologic conditions as a result of the treatment. One of the critical factors to be managed is mitral stenosis or creation of an inflow gradient. That is, if a valve system is used that does not allow for sufficient LV inflow without elevated filling pressures, then critical benefits of MR reduction are dissipated or lost. Moreover, atrial fibrillation is to be avoided as it can result if elevated pressures are not relieved by the therapy, or are created by the system (high pressure results in atrial stress leading to dilatation ultimately leading to arrhythmias). Also, if the procedure results in damage to atrial tissue at surgery, it can result in the negative physiologic effect of atrial fibrillation. Further, one should be aware of the possibility of increased LV wall stress through an increase in LV size (LV geometry). Due to the integral relationship of the mitral valve with LV geometry through the papillary and chordal apparatus, LV wall stress levels can be directly affected resulting in alterations of LV filling and contraction mechanics. Accordingly, a system that does not preserve or worsens the geometry of the LV can counter the benefits of MR reduction because of the alteration of contractile physiology.
It has been generally agreed that it is preferable if the native valve can be repaired (e.g. with an annular ring), versus an open surgical valve replacement. Repair of valve elements that target the regurgitant jet only results in minimal alteration to the valve elements/structures that are properly functioning allowing for the least potential for negatively affecting the overall physiology while achieving the primary goal. Native valve preservation can be beneficial because a well repaired valve is considered to have a better chance of having long standing durability versus a replacement with an artificial valve that has durability limits. Also, while current surgical artificial valves attempt chord sparing procedures, the LV geometric relationship may be negatively altered if not performed or performed poorly leading to an increase in LV wall stress due to an increase in LV diameter. Thus, while repair is preferred and possible for technically competent surgeons, the relatively high recurrence rate of MR due to inadequate repair, the invasiveness of the surgery especially in sick or functional MR patients, and the complexities of a repair for many surgeons lead to a high percentage of mitral operations being surgical replacement.
Conventionally, surgical repair or replacement of the mitral valve is performed on cardiopulmonary bypass and is usually performed via an open median sternotomy resulting in one of the most invasive high risk cardiac surgical operations performed, especially in subpopulations such as those with functional MR. Therefore, a key improvement to mitral valve operations is to significantly lower the risk and invasiveness, specifically utilizing a percutaneous or minimally invasive technique.
While there have been attempts to replicate existing surgical repair via less invasive surgical or percutaneous methods, given the complexity of repairing the valve surgically, the efforts have largely been deemed lacking in achieving adequate efficacy and have not altered the risk benefit ratio sufficiently to warrant ongoing investment, regulatory approval, or adoption. In particular, there has been a general technology failure due to the complexity of anatomy to percutaneously manage with an implant or implantable procedure. The broad spectrum of mitral disease directly influences outcomes with a resulting inability to match technology with pathology. There has also been observed inadequate efficacy with poor surgical replication and safety results. It has also been recognized that percutaneous approaches have been successful to certain valve procedures, such as aortic valve replacement associated with a single pathology and a relatively circular rigid substrate, mitral valves often suffer from multiple pathologies and a have flexible or elastic annulus with multiple structures, making this a more challenging goal.
Further challenges exist in positioning and orienting mitral regurgitation therapy structures at the interventional site. Cooperation and sealing between component parts has also been a consideration in effective mitral regurgitation therapy. Additionally, more can be done to both identify and take advantage of native anatomical features common to the mitral valve. More can also be done to streamline the implantation process.
Accordingly, what is needed is an effective long lasting MR reduction without creating negative physiologic consequences to the cardio-pulmonary system (heart, lungs, peripheral vasculature) including stenosis, LV wall stress and atrial fibrillation. It is also desirable to be able to perform the operation in a reliable, repeatable, and easy to perform procedure and to have a broadly applicable procedure for both patients and physicians, while employing a significantly less invasive method. Moreover, it is desirable to take advantage of anatomical features leading themselves to an effective mitral regurgitation therapy, and to provide component structures which cooperate to address regurgitation as well as implantation aids facilitating proper orientation and placement.
The present disclosure addresses these and other needs.
Briefly and in general terms, the present disclosure is directed towards replacement systems and methods. In one particular aspect, the present disclosure describes a percutaneous or minimally invasive mitral valve replacement system that eliminates MR, provides adequate physiologic inflow, and preserves and/or improves LV geometry in a reliable, repeatable, and easy to perform procedure.
In one aspect, there is provided a mitral valve replacement system including an anchoring structure and an artificial valve configured to treat a native heart. The assembly can include one or more of anterior and posterior atrial stabilizers and a systolic anterior motion (SAM) stabilization feature. Moreover, an anchor assembly can be configured with four feet or projections sized and shaped to engage an anatomical gutter located in the left ventricle proximate the mitral valve annulus which acts as support for subsequent implantation of a replacement valve assembly. The anchor can further include valve retaining structure for positioning the valve supra-annularly. Such retaining structure can be ring-like including connected arches with webbing and intra-arch supports. Sealing with native valve structure is provided by a valve skirt. Device delivery control features can be provided on superior aspects of anchor arches. The anchor can also include a hub which can be manipulated for accomplishing delivery.
The anchor assembly includes structure for placement at or proximate a mitral valve annulus, as well as structure for sealing within anatomy and engagement of the mitral valve assembly. The implanted mitral valve presents a tri-leaflet structure for controlling blood flow, as well as structure for accomplishing a seal within the anchor. In certain approaches, forces can be translated to various anatomical features of and proximate the mitral valve. In one approach, an anchor assembly can be implanted within the anatomical gutter leaving the leaflets of the mitral valve unaffected in terms of valve function. In other approaches, structure of the anchor can cross the annulus of the mitral valve and can further partially or completely retain leaflets. Thus, forces generated by the heart and inherent in blood flow can be translated by an anchor directly and solely to the anatomical gutter, or such forces can be in part translated to leaflet, chordae and papillary muscle anatomy to varying degrees.
In one approach, the mitral valve replacement system addresses a number of basic functional requirements. One requirement is the valve function itself, the occlusion of flow during systole, and open to flow during diastole. Another requirement is the seal between the artificial replacement valve frame/structure and the tissue to prevent/minimize any paravalvular leaks or flow. A further requirement is the anchoring or securement function to hold the functioning valve in position and withstand the substantial and variable cyclical load placed on the valve during systolic pressurization of the valve surface. It is intended that each of these is met in the durable, therapeutically, and physiologically appropriate mitral valve replacement system disclosed herein.
The presently disclosed system may utilize a staged approach to the functional elements of the system, starting with the anchoring or securement functional element. Additionally, the staging can be performed within a single procedure or in multiple, time separated procedures, e.g. on different days. By staging and separating functional elements, the individual elements will be simpler in design and simpler to deploy and implant. This staging of the anchor implantation of the present invention provides a stable, reliable, consistent, substrate to deliver a replacement valve into the mitral position.
A mitral valve treatment system according to the present disclosure includes one or more of an anchor element, a sealing element, and a valve element, and can utilize an anchor delivery system, and a valve delivery system. More than one element may be incorporated into a structure, for example, an anchor element also may include a sealing structure, or a valve element may include a sealing structure. In accordance with the present teachings, the elements of the valve replacement system may be implanted in staged procedures, for example, an anchor element may be implanted during a first procedure and a valve element may be implanted during a second procedure. As disclosed herein, the processes, systems used for implantation, and timing of implantation may vary. The present disclosure further contemplates that the anchor element (and in some cases sealing element) of the disclosed mitral valve replacement system may be used with existing valve technologies, as discussed further below. Similarly, delivery systems may include those disclosed herein, but the present disclosure also contemplates that existing delivery systems may be used to deliver prior art valve structures.
Moreover, the valve anchor approach can fundamentally alter the complexity of performing a completely percutaneous mitral replacement by creating a reliable and consistent substrate. Thus, it is intended that the implant design make use of the geometry/mechanics of the commissures to create sufficient holding capability. In one particular aspect, as stated, the anatomical gutter found below a valve annulus is the site for anchoring. Further, design and delivery approaches that maintain native valve function providing the ability to completely separate and stage the implantation of the system functional components is contemplated as are delivery methods that have potential for quick fluoroscopic delivery, positioning, and deployment. Consequently, there is an optimal valve performance opportunity due to maximal design flexibility and technology leveraging, and a delivery capability to achieve precise positioning prior to valve deployment. The same creates desired tissue/implant sealing and maintains sub-valvular structural relationships.
Accordingly, employing the present system and method facilitates effective long lasting MR reduction without creating negative physiologic consequences to the cardio-pulmonary system (heart, lungs, peripheral vasculature) including stenosis, LV wall stress, and atrial fibrillation. The method can involve performance of the operation in a reliable, repeatable, and easy to perform procedure and is a broadly applicable procedure for both patients and physicians. A significantly less invasive method results, one which can be fully percutaneous from the start.
Other features and advantages of the present disclosure will become apparent from the following detailed description, taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, which illustrate, by way of example, the principles of the invention.
Referring now to the drawings, which are provided by way of background and example, and not limitation, the present disclosure relates to medical interventional procedures and devices. In various aspects, heart valve therapy is addressed and in particular, mitral valve replacement approaches are presented.
Overall, the present disclosure describes a system including an anchor, valve, and delivery technology that allows therapeutic flexibility (mitral replacement with either tissue or mechanical valves), implantation flexibility via either fully percutaneous or minimally invasive (trans-apical, trans-atrial) procedures, minimized delivery complexity to allow a simple to-perform procedure, and a patient population that is not restricted by the underlying pathology.
A mitral valve replacement system according to the present disclosure includes one or more of an anchor element, sealing structure, a valve element, and a valve delivery system. An anatomical gutter proximate the mitral valve is intended to be a target for anchoring at least portions of the replacement system. Generally, the gutter is a three dimensional composite LV sided anatomic structure that extends in a u-shape from one trigone region to the other bounded by the mitral leaflets on one side, annulus in the base region of the gutter, and the LV wall on the other side. Functionally, it collects and diverts sub-annular/leaflet blood during systole into the aortic outflow tract.
More than one element may be incorporated into a structure, for example, an anchor element also may include a sealing structure, or a valve element may include a sealing structure. In accordance with the present teachings, the elements of the valve replacement system may be implanted in staged procedures, for example, an anchor element may be implanted during a first procedure and a valve element may be implanted during a second procedure. As disclosed herein, the processes, systems used for implantation, and timing of implantation may vary. The present disclosure further contemplates that the anchor element (and in some cases sealing element) of the disclosed mitral valve replacement system may be used with existing valve structures, as discussed further below. Similarly, delivery systems may include those disclosed herein, but the present disclosure also contemplates that existing delivery systems may be used to deliver prior art valve structures.
It should be noted that in planned percutaneous structural heart interventions (TAVI, mitral repair, mitral replacement), there are typically at least two procedures performed for each individual patient. The first procedure includes a diagnostic assessment and possible PCI/stenting of the patient's coronary arteries and often includes a right heart cath for cardiac physiology assessment. Valve implantation and or repair are generally not performed prior to knowing the patient has been previously completely revascularized if necessary.
Generally the most difficult and most significant requirement for a less invasive valve system is the anchoring attachment of the system. The presently disclosed mitral valve replacement system staging of the anchor implantation allows the use of various anatomic valve and ventricular structures to achieve the required holding force of the anchor system. When performed in two time separated procedures, staging the implantation of the anchor separately from other system elements provides time for tissue ingrowth into the anchor structure and resultant strengthening of the overall holding force of the anchor structure in the anatomy.
Staging of anchor implantation allows for maintaining native valve function until artificial valve element(s) are in place. Staging also helps in mitral valve replacement where there is limited operating space. It is to be recognized that immediate valve placement after anchor implanting is contemplated.
With reference to
It is contemplated that anchor element embodiments utilize and exploit anatomic structures and geometry to attain the required mechanical holding forces whether engaged acutely or chronically with the addition of tissue ingrowth of the anchor. Another aspect is consideration of the anchor implant is the load distribution or force per unit of area of anchor attachment. This can be at a level that does not allow the anchor structure(s) to pull out of the tissue once attached. To maximize acute mechanical hold in the tissue, the profile geometry of the anchor tissue element can be designed to maximize the breadth and depth of tissue engagement as well as the surface width and geometry of the penetrating element. The tissue providing the holding force for the anchor can be used such that certain regions of the mitral valve have greater intrinsic tensile strength (e.g. anatomical gutter or trigone region) or utilize tissue that has a response that enhances the extent (thickness, area) of ingrowth (e.g. LV muscle wall). The tissue collagen orientation in certain regions needs to be accounted for if it is small chain, non-oriented fibers or can be used to maximize hold if it is larger chain and oriented collagen.
Due to the continuous and cyclical loads and motion of the system, anchor device mechanical integrity is likely required, specifically fatigue resistance, corrosion resistance and overall mechanical durability. One of the system elements is intended to interface with tissue to form a seal. This can be the anchor forming the seal and the valve seals to the anchor, or the anchor holds valve and a valve element seals to the tissue. The implanted valve interface to anchor can provide sufficient and stable holding capability with a transfer of the valve load effectively onto the anchor. This may be accomplished by a frictional fit via expansion of the valve into the anchor and/or tissue or a mechanical interlock mechanism between the anchor and valve. Further, the anchor implant structure can be a biocompatible device, including specific biocompatibility for blood contact and tissue contact.
The specific anatomic locations that may provide mechanical and structural attachment of the anchor is another area of consideration. The anchor may be designed to incorporate one or more of a commissural location such as the anterior trigone region or the posterior leaflet cleft. An attachment location could also be the anterior portion of an atrial wall, or at an annular region/surface (posterior or anterior). Leaflet capture is also contemplated such as at the sub-posterior leaflet or the sub commissural leaflet. Attachment can also be at or within the left ventricle (endocardial) such as to the posterior wall (including posterior leaflet capture or a papillary space wedge), the apical/sub-papillary, the anterior/posterior wall bridge, or transmurally (septal, free wall, apex).
With reference to
Further details concerning the gutter 120 can be understood from
Turning now to
It is to be noted that while various features of the anchor and valve assembly 175 have been shown and described below in connection with a number of different embodiments, any one or more features presented of one embodiment or approach can be incorporated into another embodiment or approach.
It is to be recognized that the mitral annulus is typically nonplanar, non-circular in shape, flexible and distensible. These all contribute to a complex substrate to effectively attach an artificial valve, and specifically the anchor structure. In this regard, there is contemplated a general cone-in-cone fit between the anchor and the artificial valve, the anchor receiving the artificial valve. The anchor will thus support the valve supra-annularly so that much of the structure of the artificial valve will not interact with native tissue. The first anchor is also equipped with arches that provide additional support to the frame to create a greater fatigue resistance. The anchor itself can thus include various approaches to support the skeletal structure. In one approach, the structure can be a supra-valvular structure with commissural feet. The commissural feet/projections can be structures which are multi-functional elements that can provide mechanical/geometric anchoring, penetration (needle/barb like) securement, and tissue based incorporation (in-growth) including subvalvular/sub-leaflet structures that extend into the LV wall, all of which do not interrupt leaflet, chordae or native valve function. Also, they can provide a positioning basis for the entire anchor because of their engagement with the commissural clefts in the anterior and posterior leaflets while still avoiding interaction or disruption of the chordae or native leaflets.
An anchor frame structure can be designed to provide a D-shaped or alternatively a relatively circular, non-distensible, non-elongating homogeneous frame substrate that the artificial valve can engage and attach to during its deployment. This structure may be continuous or interrupted, and completely around annulus or only partially around annular circumference. Moreover, portions of the anchor can be sinusoidal in plane of valve leaflets trying to create continuous attachment around entire circumference (each sinusoid comes in and out of plane) or sinusoidal perpendicular to valve bridging from point to point creating, multiple attachment points, thereby allowing for tissue ingrowth between sinusoidal points of native leaflet or annulus tissue contact/engagement. The anchor can be malleable with points of attachment between commissures, a single wire or multiple connected wire components, or be formed into a saddle configuration to approximate natural saddle geometry of valve (may be based off of 3d echo or CT to determine geometry).
There may further be a covering of the skeletal frame of the anchor. The covering of the anchor skeleton can provide opportunity for facilitating tissue ingrowth into or onto the implant structure and/or covering in locations such as on top (atrial side) of leaflet or annulus, at side of leaflets or annulus, at a ventricular wall at sub-valvular level, or underneath (ventricular side) of the leaflet or commissures.
A superstructure above the valve annulus may provide options for valve attachment to the anchor or even an alternative therapy such as mitral repair via a septal lateral cinch. Various superstructures above the annulus can include A2 P2 points of attachment, two circles to allow for double valves, or use of the atrial wall behind A2 or P2.
Materials for components used in multiple combinations and configurations, may include metals, especially for the anchor skeleton or frame structures such as Nitinol because of its superelasticity and ability to be compressed into a deliverable shape/state and then deployed into a functional state, titanium due to its strength and biocompatibility, stainless steel: hardened for its strength or malleable to aid in conforming to shape, cobalt/chromium alloy for strength and known valve component implant history; or composites to provide multiple properties based on anatomic location. Tissue elements also may be incorporated on the anchor implant to aid overall function of holding or tissue engagement and sealing including pericardial (bovine, ovine, porcine) tissue or valve tissue (bovine, ovine, porcine). Further synthetic polymers can be used as biocompatible elements in implants and on the anchor due to their know tissue and blood compatibility properties. These can include Elast-Eon (a silicone and urethane copolymer), ePTFE, urethane, silicone, PEEK, polyester (PET), or UHMWPE.
Geometric/mechanical holding force for anchor that exploits the geometry/configuration of anatomic structures (relative to force vector) to achieve the necessary holding force required by a deployed artificial valve or other therapeutic element is further contemplated. The force vector encountered by the anchor structure's commissural projections provide a perpendicular load relative to the tissue. Commissural projections or foot elements that are able to deploy behind the anterior and posterior leaflets in the gutter where the leaflet meets the annulus provides for direct mechanical holding capability. The commissural projections of the anchor structure connected and bridged to each other provide an ability to hold the valve in position. LV wall projections of the commissural feet can provide for the ability to develop deep tissue penetration elements into the muscle, wider elements to increase surface area of contact/attachment, and longer projections to increase holding capacity. Moreover, because the projections can be placed such that they are supra annular and sub-annular, a C like structure in cross section can be utilized that is either connected or clamped. With regard to tissue penetration based securement, direct mechanical holding force is contemplated for an anchor that utilizes the natural strength of the LV and leaflet tissues to hold onto anchor structure. These elements can be configured to either be inserted into the tissue and resist pull out (barb like), or they may go into and out of tissue to provide a tissue “bite” like a stitch, or both elements can be employed. The structure can be located posterior annulus or entire annular perimeter, or adjacent leaflet tissue, the trigone/anterior annulus, an endocardial LV surface or LV Muscle tissue. Further, the tissue penetration securement elements can be linear (staple or nail like), helical (rotation axis is perpendicular to tissue interface or rotation axis is parallel to tissue interface (in/out/in/out)), curved and or curled, or bent (L shaped or S shaped).
As stated, it is also contemplated to use chronic ingrowth to provide long term stable implantation of the artificial valve and proper sealing function. In addition, chronic ingrowth of implant structural elements can serve as a fundamental mechanism to achieve the necessary holding force of the anchor functional element of the system. It exploits the natural healing response to foreign bodies placed into tissue and the blood stream to develop a strong collagen based tissue connection between the implant surface structures and the native valve tissue with a possible endothelial surface. This can be achieved while still managing the response to prevent unwanted damage to anatomic structures, damage to blood elements, or creation of thromboemboli.
More areas of consideration are the surface composition elements, specifically the material choice and texture to promote tissue reaction and device incorporation with maximal force holding capability. These elements can also be incorporated onto the tissue penetration elements to further increase the holding force by incorporation deep into tissue rather than just at the surface. The anchor can have a gross surface modification (barbs, slits), a surface texture/pores to promote ingrowth and mechanical hold, a fabric material covering (Dacron velour, double velour, ePTFE), a wire brush (multiple short wire elements) or an adhesive. There can further be a single or multiple points of attachment, planar attachment or by way of a confluent surface. Moreover, the tissue/anchor interface can be rigid or flexible and can include a wire frame structure that puts a compressive force onto surface contact interface to promote increased response. Also, tissue surface modification can include an abrasive, a chemical irritant to promote inflammatory response or application of heat.
In current conventional approaches to valvular intervention, a diagnostic echocardiograph is initially performed to assess valve function followed by two percutaneous procedures. First, a diagnostic angiography is performed with or without a right heart catheterization to assess, for example, whether they might also require revascularization first, prior to valve intervention. Here, patients do not receive valve therapy without the patient being fully revascularized. Thereafter, at a different time and place, valve replacement therapy is performed involving fixation/attachment, accomplishing a tissue sealing interface, and valve deployment and then release. In contrast, the presently described approach, however, can include an assessment involving a diagnostic echocardiography followed by a unique percutaneous valve procedure sequencing. First, a diagnostic angiography (±right heart cath) can be performed along with anchor fixation/attachment and anchor/tissue sealing. Subsequently, either later or during the same interventional procedure, valve replacement therapy can occur involving valve deployment and release. Thus, since the anchor implant allows the native valve to remain functional, the anchor implantation procedure could be added to the end of the angio (±PCI), and not require a separate interventional procedure. A quick, simple, and reliable anchor deployment could permit a fully ingrown structure that significantly enhances the holding force of a subsequently implanted replacement valve. Tissue ingrowth of the entire anchor perimeter, or at key positions thereon, can in fact provide the necessary tissue seal in advance of valve deployment. Moreover, the anchor design could be simplified due to less required acute holding force. Therefore, a tissue incorporated and healed anchor provides a structure to perform several methods of annular adjustment, including plication, reduction annuloplasty, and septal-lateral cinching.
In one specific embodiment, the anchor assembly 200 can be embodied in a frame 202 including supra-annular and sub-annular structure (See
Extending from the frame 202 are a plurality of projections or feet 214, 216. Such projections are sized and shaped to engage the sub-annular, valve gutter described above. A first pair of projections 214 (anterior feet) are sized and shaped to each extend through one of anterior and posterior commissures and engage within or adjacent the trigone structure. In one approach, the projections can be spaced approximately 30-45 mm. Also, the projections can have a height ranging from up to 8 mm to 12 mm or more, and have a gutter engaging surface area (when fabric covered) ranging from 6-24 mm2. The width of the projection can range from 1.5 to 4 mm or more and have a length ranging up to 4 mm to 6 mm or more. A second pair of projections 216 (posterior feet) are also provided. A distance between the first and second pair of projections can be about 20-30 mm. The projections 216 are sized and shaped so that when implanted they avoid interference with mitral chordae, valve leaflets, and papillary muscles. Terminal ends of the projections are further configured to be sized and shaped to be received within and engage a posterior portion of the sub-annular gutter (as shown and described above).
The sub-annular structure of the anchor frame 202 further includes a central hub 220 which can both function as structure employed as a releasable connection during device delivery, as well as a base from which sub-annular support arms 252 extend, one to each projection 214, 216. With specific reference to
In an alternative embodiment of an anchor assembly 250 as shown in
With reference to
As stated, staging is the ability to stage the implantation of valve structure so that it could be deployed in the same procedure as that of the implantation of anchor and sealing structures, or thereafter. As the anchor and sealing structures grow into and are incorporated in the tissue/existing anatomy, the holding capability of these structures increases until such time as the valve/assembly is deployed, either automatically (e.g., suture dissolving over time) or by some trigger mechanism or actuation during a second procedure. This actuation could be achieved remotely without invading the body (e.g., RF or ultrasound-like actuation).
The valve replacement system according to the present disclosure allows for valve delivery flexibility. Specifically, tissue valves can be delivered either via a fully percutaneous procedure or a minimally invasive surgical delivery of the valve without modification to the valve implant to accommodate the alternative route.
Yet another aspect of having a stable consistent anchor platform for receiving a valve structure is that it allows for valve sizing that is appropriate for the patient population (FMR, structural, mixed) and even specific to the patient being treated. In other words, it allows for the largest valve possible in every patient rather than compromising size (smaller than physiologically desired) to accommodate technology limitations in systems that must combine multiple (increase complexity) valve, attachment, sealing and delivery structures.
The system according to the present teachings also allows for therapeutic flexibility of the artificial valve. The presently disclosed system allows for beating heart implantation of both tissue and mechanical valves. It is thus, contemplated that delivery systems are provided that allow implantation of mechanical valves via either a trans-apical or trans-atrial thorascopic route.
Moreover, while surgical tissue replacement valves in the mitral position have conventionally often been basic and inverted modifications of the tri-leaflet aortic counterpart, the percutaneous delivery requirements (collapse/expand) of the TMVR allows for designs specific to mitral position on several functional requirements. For example, there is sufficient size for blood inflow so as to not trade regurgitation for stenosis. One key aspect is that in functional MR with native annular dilatation, the replacement valve does not need to fill the whole annular area of the now dilated annulus. A smaller area can be used while still creating sufficient size to prevent any inflow obstruction/stenosis. Also, it is desirable to maintain LV chordal connections and geometry to maintain LV functional geometry and stress configuration. Cutting or disruption of the chords can create significant increases in LV wall stress and resultant loss of cardiac function.
A durable valve design balances sufficient valve height relative to the diameter to prevent excessive post loads and leaflet stresses. In the mitral position (vs. aortic) this is accentuated with the generally larger valve diameter requirement (lower through flow pressure) and the higher valve loads encountered when closed (LV systolic pressure vs. diastolic aortic pressure). In surgical replacement mitral tissue valves, the valves are designed for the base to be sewn to the annulus with stent leaflet posts extending downward (into LV) from the base. Leaflet posts are designed to be short to minimize LV depth and prevent outflow tract obstruction or native leaflet entanglement. In these valves, the base also tends to be designed as a cylinder and therefore is not extended into the atrium to prevent potential pockets of stagnated blood.
Sealing against the native valve is to be a consideration. A valve that relies on radial expansion and or compression to create the seal requires a valve frame that is larger than the native annulus and exerts radial force to create the interface. Sufficient anchoring interface and holding is also an important consideration. Valves that rely on frictional interface to create anchoring force require relatively larger radial expansion force capability increasing the complexity of the stent frame. Ability to collapse into a deliverable configuration and then reliably expanded configuration can be addressed as well as the prevention of LV outflow tract obstruction. Too great of an encroachment into the LV beyond the native mitral annulus can impact the position and function of the native anterior leaflet. If it is pushed too far down and out, it can directly reduce the dimension of the LV outflow tract and/or allow the non-functional native anterior leaflet to be pulled into the outflow tract during systole creating functional obstruction of the LV outflow tract. Moreover, prevention of flow stagnation regions to prevent clot formation and embolization can be important on both the atrial side as well as the ventricular side, specifically in the sub-leaflet gutter region.
Regarding these final two considerations, aortic valves that are being modified to use in mitral position as well as surgical valves conventionally all have a generally tubular design at their base region or beyond up into the commissural post region. This tubular design that bridges across the native mitral valve has the possibility of creating outflow tract obstruction and pockets of stagnation behind the valve and native leaflet region if it extends too deep into LV or can create significant flow stagnation regions if the “tube” extends too far into atrium with blood having to flow up and over the valve base to reach LV during diastole. Additionally, the use of a tubular symmetric valve in a D-shaped mitral annulus may distort the prosthetic valve shape result in uneven distribution of stresses across leaflets and therefore reduced durability.
Thus, in one contemplated embodiment of a percutaneous replacement mitral valve, there is structure for facilitating an optimum valve for the mitral position. With respect to atrial biased positioning, the contemplated valve is positioned with a bias to the atrial side with the LV side only extending to or short of the commissural and posterior leaflet tips when they are in the diastolic position (vertical to LV wall). This allows for minimal interference with native leaflets and chordal connections, minimizing engagement and interference with the anterior leaflet therefore minimizing potential for outflow tract obstruction, minimizing sub-leaflet (LV side flow stagnation and potential for clot formation and embolization, and allows for sufficient valve height to manage commissural post strain and leaflet stresses. Taller or longer leaflets for a given valve diameter have smaller leaflet stresses.
The contemplated approach is also contemplated to embody a “ring in ring” stent design. Here, this is an inner ring for large circular leaflet/occluder geometry for optimum function and durability. The inner ring can consist of the 3 commissural posts joined by the 3 arches and the 3 leaflet cusps sewn to the posts and arches. This structural relationship that allows the outer ring to deflect and adapt to the non-circular native anatomy while maintaining circular inner geometry allows for overall better valve performance and maximizes durability. Another aspect of this configuration is that the leaflet excursion during diastole where the leaflets define a circular shape is that the leaflets do not impact or come into contact with the outer support frame/ring reducing the likelihood of damage to the leaflet tips as can happen with an overall circular support frame. Moreover, it is contemplated that the leaflets can be formed from glutaraldehyde fixed pericardium or aortic cusps from one or more of a bovine, porcine, ovine or equine, and having a thickness of 0.005-0.020 inches or specifically between 0.008-0.012 inches and being anisotropic (collagen fibers circumferentially oriented) such that modulus in one direction is higher than another (E circumferential>E radial).
The replacement mitral valve also includes central support of commissural posts (vs. base) to minimize cyclical strain and improved durability. Loading during leaflet closure is translated to the posts and creates tip deflection toward the valve center. Having the posts supported more to the middle of the overall stent frame helps minimize cyclical strain and therefore improves durability. The longer posts and leaflet height combine with a more centrally supported post to improve overall durability due to more uniform distribution of stresses between the leaflets. Further provided is an outer ring for adaptable sealing interface and native valve engagement. The outer ring can adapt to the native leaflet and valve shape and size while maintaining the central core inner ring.
The contemplated replacement valve can also include a scalloped or arched leaflet cusp design. With the more atrial positioned valve, the scalloped arches or cusps help minimize atrial flow stagnation both during diastole when the leaflets are in the open position, the blood flows between arches which sit proximate the native annular height, and during systole as the backside (non-leaflet side) of each arch is also pressurized and creates dynamic motion behind the cusps. Traditional tubular design valves have no such capability. With the leaflet cusps sewn to the arches, there is also efficient load transfer from the leaflets to the arches and then to anchor structure, also minimizing stent deflection/strain and enhanced durability.
The replacement valve is also contemplated to include structure for engagement with the anchor. In this way, an interlock of supra-annular structure is presented. In one approach, a cone-in-cone fit is employed to create the interlock. This structure of the valve engages with the anchor structure to provide for a described geometric interlock for load transfer to the anchor rather than frictional fit to anchor or the native valve. Therefore, the radial strength of the valve is less than required if a frictional fit was used; it needs to be properly sized, but does not require radial force expansion into the anchor ring.
Additionally, collapsibility, expression, repositioning, and recapturing of valve are all further requirements or desirable aspects of the overall valve design. The current embodiment has several elements that contribute to an improved capability to perform these functions. That is, the potentially lower radial force required for the overall valve design can allow the valve to collapse with less force both initially during insertion into delivery catheter, as well as when the valve may need to be partially collapsed for repositioning, or fully collapsed for recapture and removal. Also, the arches of the valve create an improved leading edge (rather than a collapsed cylinder) for the valve to be retrieved into the delivery sheath if needed, provide natural points of holding and individual control during expression and deployment, and provide lower regional outward radial force that facilitates holding during deployment into the anchor as well as during recapture. The arches or scallops can allow the valve to partially function during placement for a more controlled implant with less potential for negative hemodynamic consequences to the patient. Also, attachment to the arches allows for functional assessment of valve prior to final release. The three points of proximal hold also create the ability to control the planarity of the valve so it becomes coplanar with the anchor prior to full deployment. The three inner posts also may provide a distal holding point during delivery.
Accordingly, referring to
With specific reference to
The frame 310 includes a plurality of rows of closed cells 320. Although the cells 320 can assume various shapes, as shown, when expanded, each cell includes upper and lower narrowed ends and a wide mid-section. Additional support is provided by members 322 extending from the arches 314, to thereby define a larger V-shaped cell 326 encompassing each of the posts 319. Further provided are loops 330. Such loops can be included for strength or integrity and can be connected to adjacent arches 314. Loops 300 may be configured to hook over adjacent portions of the anchor for positioning control, as can be seen in
Turning to
For illustration purposes, an uncovered anchor (embodiment) is shown in simulated anatomical structures (See
The requirements of the sealing interface with the native valve include ventricular to atrial sealing during systole, atrial to ventricular sealing during diastole, and stable chronic sealing that results from ingrowth incorporation of the sealing interface with the native valve. One approach to sealing is to utilize a native tissue engagement structure with the native leaflets along the annular perimeter to create a LV pressurized seal. This is not a mechanically compressive or attachment (active fixation) seal onto the native tissue. It also requires minimal or no radial expansion beyond the tissue engagement interface. In one contemplated embodiment of the percutaneous mitral valve, the frame is externally covered by tissue. During systole, the tissue expands radially reaching out to the native valve to create a paravalvular seal. The external tissue also expands radially on the atrial side cuff (outer covering on valve) to create a supra annular seal during systole.
As shown in
With respect to orientation/positioning methods, utilizing a separately implanted anchor substrate is the ability to utilize a fluoroscopic alignment technique to mesh the anchor with the valve. In this scenario, the x-ray fluoroscopic camera could be adjusted so a radiopaque (complete or interrupted around perimeter) anchor structure would be visualized in a relatively straight line (camera orientation—line connecting emitter with intensifier—is perpendicular to anchor circular axis, or parallel to plane of anchor ring). The valve frame structure could similarly have a radiopaque perimeter at the point at or near the interlock region with the anchor. When the anchor was viewed in the manner described, the valve axial orientation could be adjusted so the radiopaque perimeter was also a line (without moving camera position) meaning the two cylindrical axes of the anchor and valve were now parallel. Subsequently, the valve line could be appropriately positioned above, below, or at the interlock region. This linear alignment of the two radiopaque structures would be even more visually pronounced as the valve frame was being expanded/deployed, whether by balloon or self-expanding. This could additionally allow for fine tuning or adjustment prior to final engagement of the valve with the anchor structure.
General fluoroscopy based methods can be used to evaluate use of markers/overlays on a fluoro screen within the same camera/table position. It is noted that some equipment has built in marking capability within an image view. Further, device length markers in the form of a pigtail with 1 cm marks (useful in the Back view where pigtail is running through center of image) can be employed as can a wire with 1 cm marks along distal length, such as 1 cm marks on the pusher shaft. Further, dye injection methods are contemplated to better view sub-leaflet structure (with a curved diagnostic catheter placed sub-P2). Visible or augmented anatomic landmarks are of course to be considered including use of a guidewire in circumflex and tracking of the ICE probe or guidewire into coronary sinus. Finally, evaluations using echo LAX views to see leaflet tips in foot locations are contemplated.
Next addressed are general requirements for delivering a replacement mitral valve via a trans-septal approach, into a previously placed anchor. It is desirable that the valve be collapsed/compressed and encapsulated in some manner to navigate the venous system to the right atrium and to cross the inter-atrial septum and engage the native valve and the anchor retention structure in the disclosed embodiment. Also, given the relative stiffness of the collapsed valve assembly in this region, there may be a need for a flexible or possibly articulating segment proximal and possibly distal of the encapsulated valve region of the delivery system to aid with tracking. Further, the delivery system should be able to navigate a primary curve in the right atrium and trans-septal region of the anatomy. The system can then be able to navigate a secondary curve from the septum back toward the mitral valve, which may be out of plane relative the primary curve. The encapsulated valve can then also be able to be controllably expressed out of the catheter. In general, this can be accomplished via an advancement of the valve out of the catheter or via a pullback of an encapsulating sheath. The former requires significant adjustment and anticipation of final valve position as it is expressed. Unsheathing allows the valve to be in relative axial position prior to expression into the anchor structure. It may also be desirable during valve delivery to be able to reposition prior to full expression and deployment, primarily axially and to recapture or retrieval of the valve for removal prior to and after full expression and deployment. Moreover, it may be desirable for the delivery system to have temporary or releasable connections or holding points to control position as the valve begins to become loaded, as well as enable retrieval. Imaging visibility on fluoro and echo to facilitate alignment and positioning relative to native valve and the anchor of the disclosed embodiment is also contemplated. The alignment and positioning of the system includes axial position, rotational orientation, planar x-y position relative to native valve plane, and the axial vector relative to the perpendicular vector of the native valve plane.
Turning now to certain aspects of a delivery structure there is shown in
As shown in
In one particular approach (See
In another approach (
However, if retrieval is desired before full deployment and release of the anchor 250, the anchor 250 can be removed atraumatically upon extension of the pushrod. This elongates and straightens the skids 298, and pushes the valve leaflets (not shown) out of the way, allowing for the feet 214, 216 to be pulled back through the native valve without having to flex backward. The entire anchor can then be pulled into the delivery catheter, or a separate retrieval catheter.
Further modifications and alternative embodiments will be apparent to those of ordinary skill in the art in view of the disclosure herein. For example, the systems and the methods may include additional components or steps that were omitted from the diagrams and description for clarity of operation. Moreover, those of ordinary skill in the art will appreciate that aspects and/or features disclosed with respect to one embodiment in some cases may be incorporated in other embodiments even if not specifically described with respect to such other embodiments. It is to be understood that the various embodiments shown and described herein are to be taken as exemplary, including dimensions of various components, and as such various sizes outside of identified ranges are also contemplated. Elements and materials, and arrangements of those elements and materials, may be substituted for those illustrated and described herein, parts and processes may be reversed, and certain features of the present teachings may be utilized independently, all as would be apparent to one skilled in the art after having the benefit of the description herein. Changes may be made in the elements described herein without departing from the spirit and scope of the present teachings and following claims. Accordingly, this description is to be construed as illustrative only and is for the purpose of enabling those skilled in the art the general manner of carrying out the present teachings. It is to be understood that the particular examples and embodiments set forth herein are nonlimiting, and modifications to structure, dimensions, materials, and methodologies may be made without departing from the scope of the present teachings. Other embodiments in accordance with the present disclosure will be apparent to those skilled in the art from consideration of the specification and practice of the invention disclosed herein. It is intended that the specification and examples be considered as exemplary only, with a true scope and spirit being indicated by the following claims.
Thus, it will be apparent from the foregoing that, while particular forms of the invention have been illustrated and described, various modifications can be made without parting from the spirit and scope of the invention.
This application claims the benefit of U.S. Application Ser. No. 62/011,164, filed Jun. 12, 2014. The disclosure of the prior application is considered part of and is incorporated by reference in the disclosure of this application.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4680031 | Alonso | Jul 1987 | A |
5423887 | Love et al. | Jun 1995 | A |
5662704 | Gross | Sep 1997 | A |
5855601 | Bessler et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5984959 | Robertson et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
6113631 | Jansen | Sep 2000 | A |
6296662 | Caffey | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6309417 | Spence et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6332893 | Mortier et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6358277 | Duran | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6425916 | Garrison et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6530952 | Vesely | Mar 2003 | B2 |
6569196 | Vesely | May 2003 | B1 |
6582462 | Andersen et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6629534 | St. Goar et al. | Oct 2003 | B1 |
6730118 | Spenser et al. | May 2004 | B2 |
6730121 | Ortiz et al. | May 2004 | B2 |
6767362 | Schreck | Jul 2004 | B2 |
6769434 | Liddicoat et al. | Aug 2004 | B2 |
6790229 | Berreklouw | Sep 2004 | B1 |
6883522 | Spence et al. | Apr 2005 | B2 |
6893459 | Macoviak | May 2005 | B1 |
6893460 | Spenser et al. | May 2005 | B2 |
6908481 | Cribier | Jun 2005 | B2 |
6949122 | Adams et al. | Sep 2005 | B2 |
7011681 | Vesely | Mar 2006 | B2 |
7018406 | Seguin et al. | Mar 2006 | B2 |
7044966 | Svanidze et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
7101396 | Artof et al. | Sep 2006 | B2 |
7147663 | Berg et al. | Dec 2006 | B1 |
7160322 | Gabbay | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7175656 | Khairkhahan | Feb 2007 | B2 |
7217287 | Wilson et al. | May 2007 | B2 |
7252682 | Seguin | Aug 2007 | B2 |
7320704 | Lashinski et al. | Jan 2008 | B2 |
7329278 | Seguin et al. | Feb 2008 | B2 |
7381218 | Schreck | Jun 2008 | B2 |
7381220 | Macoviak et al. | Jun 2008 | B2 |
7393360 | Spenser et al. | Jul 2008 | B2 |
7442204 | Schwammenthal et al. | Oct 2008 | B2 |
7503930 | Sharkawy et al. | Mar 2009 | B2 |
7510575 | Spenser et al. | Mar 2009 | B2 |
7524330 | Berreklouw | Apr 2009 | B2 |
7524331 | Birdsall | Apr 2009 | B2 |
7578843 | Shu | Aug 2009 | B2 |
7585321 | Cribier | Sep 2009 | B2 |
7597711 | Drews et al. | Oct 2009 | B2 |
7618446 | Andersen et al. | Nov 2009 | B2 |
7625403 | Krivoruchko | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7632308 | Loulmet | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7708775 | Rowe et al. | May 2010 | B2 |
7717955 | Lane et al. | May 2010 | B2 |
7722666 | Lafontaine | May 2010 | B2 |
7727276 | Machiraju | Jun 2010 | B2 |
7748389 | Salahieh et al. | Jul 2010 | B2 |
7776083 | Vesely | Aug 2010 | B2 |
7780725 | Haug et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
7785364 | Styrc | Aug 2010 | B2 |
7837727 | Goetz et al. | Nov 2010 | B2 |
7896915 | Guyenot et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
7914569 | Nguyen et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
7935144 | Robin et al. | May 2011 | B2 |
7947072 | Yang et al. | May 2011 | B2 |
7947075 | Goetz et al. | May 2011 | B2 |
7959672 | Salahieh et al. | Jun 2011 | B2 |
7981153 | Fogarty et al. | Jul 2011 | B2 |
7988725 | Gross et al. | Aug 2011 | B2 |
8016882 | Macoviak et al. | Sep 2011 | B2 |
8025695 | Fogarty et al. | Sep 2011 | B2 |
8048153 | Salahieh et al. | Nov 2011 | B2 |
8052749 | Salahieh et al. | Nov 2011 | B2 |
8055360 | Park et al. | Nov 2011 | B2 |
8057540 | Letac et al. | Nov 2011 | B2 |
8062355 | Figulla et al. | Nov 2011 | B2 |
8092518 | Schreck | Jan 2012 | B2 |
8092521 | Figulla et al. | Jan 2012 | B2 |
8092524 | Nugent et al. | Jan 2012 | B2 |
8123801 | Milo | Feb 2012 | B2 |
8133270 | Kheradvar et al. | Mar 2012 | B2 |
8142492 | Forster et al. | Mar 2012 | B2 |
8157852 | Bloom et al. | Apr 2012 | B2 |
8157853 | Laske et al. | Apr 2012 | B2 |
8163011 | Rankin | Apr 2012 | B2 |
8172898 | Alferness et al. | May 2012 | B2 |
8182528 | Salahieh et al. | May 2012 | B2 |
8182530 | Huber | May 2012 | B2 |
8206437 | Bonhoeffer et al. | Jun 2012 | B2 |
8231670 | Salahieh et al. | Jul 2012 | B2 |
8236049 | Rowe et al. | Aug 2012 | B2 |
8246677 | Ryan | Aug 2012 | B2 |
8252051 | Chau et al. | Aug 2012 | B2 |
8262724 | Seguin et al. | Sep 2012 | B2 |
8273120 | Dolan | Sep 2012 | B2 |
8277502 | Miller et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
8282051 | Nutaro et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
8287591 | Keidar et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
8292938 | Case | Oct 2012 | B2 |
8308796 | Lashinski et al. | Nov 2012 | B2 |
8308798 | Pintor et al. | Nov 2012 | B2 |
8317858 | Straubinger et al. | Nov 2012 | B2 |
8323332 | Agnew | Dec 2012 | B2 |
8323335 | Rowe et al. | Dec 2012 | B2 |
8348998 | Pintor et al. | Jan 2013 | B2 |
8403983 | Quadri et al. | Mar 2013 | B2 |
8449599 | Chau et al. | May 2013 | B2 |
8454686 | Alkhatib | Jun 2013 | B2 |
8460366 | Rowe | Jun 2013 | B2 |
8500798 | Rowe et al. | Aug 2013 | B2 |
8512398 | Alkhatib | Aug 2013 | B2 |
8512399 | Lafontaine | Aug 2013 | B2 |
8568477 | Lashinski et al. | Oct 2013 | B2 |
8579964 | Lane et al. | Nov 2013 | B2 |
8585755 | Chau et al. | Nov 2013 | B2 |
8623080 | Fogarty et al. | Jan 2014 | B2 |
8628569 | Benichou et al. | Jan 2014 | B2 |
8628571 | Hacohen et al. | Jan 2014 | B1 |
8632586 | Spenser et al. | Jan 2014 | B2 |
8641757 | Pintor et al. | Feb 2014 | B2 |
8652203 | Quadri et al. | Feb 2014 | B2 |
8657872 | Seguin | Feb 2014 | B2 |
8685085 | Guyenot et al. | Apr 2014 | B2 |
8685086 | Navia et al. | Apr 2014 | B2 |
8696742 | Pintor et al. | Apr 2014 | B2 |
8728155 | Montorfano et al. | May 2014 | B2 |
8795355 | Alkhatib | Aug 2014 | B2 |
8795356 | Quadri et al. | Aug 2014 | B2 |
8808371 | Cartledge | Aug 2014 | B2 |
8834564 | Tuval et al. | Sep 2014 | B2 |
8840662 | Salahieh et al. | Sep 2014 | B2 |
8840663 | Salahieh et al. | Sep 2014 | B2 |
8845720 | Conklin | Sep 2014 | B2 |
8852272 | Gross et al. | Oct 2014 | B2 |
8858620 | Salahieh et al. | Oct 2014 | B2 |
8870948 | Erzberger et al. | Oct 2014 | B1 |
8870949 | Rowe | Oct 2014 | B2 |
8876895 | Tuval et al. | Nov 2014 | B2 |
8894702 | Quadri et al. | Nov 2014 | B2 |
8911493 | Rowe et al. | Dec 2014 | B2 |
8926690 | Kovalsky | Jan 2015 | B2 |
8926691 | Chau et al. | Jan 2015 | B2 |
8932358 | Nehls | Jan 2015 | B1 |
8961595 | Alkhatib | Feb 2015 | B2 |
8968395 | Hauser et al. | Mar 2015 | B2 |
8986370 | Southerland et al. | Mar 2015 | B2 |
8986373 | Chau et al. | Mar 2015 | B2 |
9005277 | Pintor et al. | Apr 2015 | B2 |
9005278 | Pintor et al. | Apr 2015 | B2 |
9017399 | Gross et al. | Apr 2015 | B2 |
9023100 | Quadri et al. | May 2015 | B2 |
9034032 | McLean et al. | May 2015 | B2 |
9034033 | McLean et al. | May 2015 | B2 |
9039757 | McLean et al. | May 2015 | B2 |
9039759 | Alkhatib et al. | May 2015 | B2 |
9050188 | Schweich et al. | Jun 2015 | B2 |
9066801 | Kovalsky et al. | Jun 2015 | B2 |
9072604 | Melnick et al. | Jul 2015 | B1 |
9084676 | Chau et al. | Jul 2015 | B2 |
9132006 | Spenser et al. | Sep 2015 | B2 |
9155617 | Carpentier et al. | Oct 2015 | B2 |
9168130 | Straubinger | Oct 2015 | B2 |
9168133 | Spenser et al. | Oct 2015 | B2 |
9173738 | Murray, III et al. | Nov 2015 | B2 |
9192466 | Kovalsky et al. | Nov 2015 | B2 |
9226826 | Rust | Jan 2016 | B2 |
9241792 | Benichou et al. | Jan 2016 | B2 |
9248016 | Oba | Feb 2016 | B2 |
9259315 | Zhou et al. | Feb 2016 | B2 |
9265631 | Straubinger | Feb 2016 | B2 |
9289293 | Murad et al. | Mar 2016 | B2 |
9295547 | Costello et al. | Mar 2016 | B2 |
9295548 | Drews et al. | Mar 2016 | B2 |
9295550 | Nguyen et al. | Mar 2016 | B2 |
9301843 | Richardson et al. | Apr 2016 | B2 |
9301863 | Punga et al. | Apr 2016 | B2 |
9331328 | Eberhardt et al. | May 2016 | B2 |
9339377 | Quadri et al. | May 2016 | B2 |
9339378 | Quadri et al. | May 2016 | B2 |
9339379 | Quadri et al. | May 2016 | B2 |
9339380 | Quadri et al. | May 2016 | B2 |
9339382 | Tabor et al. | May 2016 | B2 |
9345573 | Nyuli et al. | May 2016 | B2 |
9358111 | Spence et al. | Jun 2016 | B2 |
9370423 | Ryan | Jun 2016 | B2 |
9370424 | Call et al. | Jun 2016 | B2 |
9375311 | Gloss et al. | Jun 2016 | B2 |
9439757 | Wallace et al. | Jun 2016 | B2 |
9492273 | Wallace et al. | Jun 2016 | B2 |
9387071 | Tuval et al. | Jul 2016 | B2 |
9402719 | Lane et al. | Aug 2016 | B2 |
9402721 | Buchbinder et al. | Aug 2016 | B2 |
9414913 | Beith et al. | Aug 2016 | B2 |
9414918 | Chau et al. | Aug 2016 | B2 |
9433503 | Tsukashina et al. | Sep 2016 | B2 |
9456896 | Quadri et al. | Oct 2016 | B2 |
9468525 | Kovalsky | Oct 2016 | B2 |
9480556 | Revuelta et al. | Nov 2016 | B2 |
9480559 | Vidlund et al. | Nov 2016 | B2 |
9486306 | Tegels et al. | Nov 2016 | B2 |
9510946 | Chau et al. | Dec 2016 | B2 |
9522062 | Tuval | Dec 2016 | B2 |
9532870 | Cooper et al. | Jan 2017 | B2 |
9554903 | Rowe et al. | Jan 2017 | B2 |
9561100 | Pintor et al. | Feb 2017 | B2 |
9561103 | Granada et al. | Feb 2017 | B2 |
9572662 | Morriss et al. | Feb 2017 | B2 |
9579194 | Elizondo et al. | Feb 2017 | B2 |
9579196 | Morriss et al. | Feb 2017 | B2 |
20010007956 | Letac et al. | Jul 2001 | A1 |
20010021872 | Bailey et al. | Sep 2001 | A1 |
20020151970 | Garrison et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20030055492 | Shaolian et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030130726 | Thorpe et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20040127982 | Machold et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040210307 | Khairkhahan | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040260393 | Randert et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050010287 | Macoviak et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050137689 | Salaheih et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050137690 | Salahieh et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050165479 | Drews et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050234546 | Nugent | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20060235509 | Lafontaine | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20070027533 | Douk | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070168024 | Khairkhahan | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20080004697 | Lichetenstein et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080015671 | Bonhoeffer | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080086164 | Rowe | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080103586 | Styrc et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080140189 | Nguyen et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080208327 | Rowe | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080221672 | Lamphere et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20090005863 | Goetz et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090112309 | Jaramillo | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090216312 | Straubinger et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20100049315 | Kirson | Feb 2010 | A1 |
20100100173 | Lafontaine | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100145440 | Keranen | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100217382 | Chau et al. | Aug 2010 | A1 |
20100249894 | Oba | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100249908 | Chau et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100262232 | Annest | Oct 2010 | A1 |
20100280606 | Naor | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20100298931 | Quadri | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20100312333 | Navia et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20100331972 | Pintor et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20110004296 | Lutter et al. | Jan 2011 | A1 |
20110022168 | Cartledge | Jan 2011 | A1 |
20110040374 | Goetz et al. | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110137397 | Chau et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110137410 | Hacohen | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110166636 | Rowe | Jul 2011 | A1 |
20110208293 | Tabor | Aug 2011 | A1 |
20110208298 | Tuval | Aug 2011 | A1 |
20110218619 | Benichou et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20110224785 | Hacohen | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20110245911 | Quill et al. | Oct 2011 | A1 |
20110257721 | Tabor | Oct 2011 | A1 |
20110282438 | Drews et al. | Nov 2011 | A1 |
20110295363 | Girard et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20110301702 | Rust et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20110319988 | Schankereli et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20110319989 | Lane | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20120010697 | Shin et al. | Jan 2012 | A1 |
20120016464 | Seguin | Jan 2012 | A1 |
20120035722 | Tuval | Feb 2012 | A1 |
20120053675 | Borock | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120059458 | Buchbinder et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120078357 | Conklin | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120101571 | Thambar et al. | Apr 2012 | A1 |
20120136430 | Sochman et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
20120165930 | Gifford, III et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120310328 | Olson et al. | Dec 2012 | A1 |
20130053949 | Pintor et al. | Feb 2013 | A1 |
20130079869 | Straubinger | Mar 2013 | A1 |
20130090725 | Pintor et al. | Apr 2013 | A1 |
20130116777 | Pintor et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
20130172978 | Vidlund | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130172992 | Gross et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130184811 | Rowe et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130211508 | Lane | Aug 2013 | A1 |
20130282110 | Schweich et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20130282114 | Schweich et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20130304200 | McLean et al. | Nov 2013 | A1 |
20130310928 | Morriss | Nov 2013 | A1 |
20130345799 | Lafontaine | Dec 2013 | A1 |
20140005778 | Buchbinder et al. | Jan 2014 | A1 |
20140012368 | Sugimoto | Jan 2014 | A1 |
20140012372 | Chau et al. | Jan 2014 | A1 |
20140012373 | Chau et al. | Jan 2014 | A1 |
20140039611 | Lane et al. | Feb 2014 | A1 |
20140052237 | Lane et al. | Feb 2014 | A1 |
20140200662 | Eftel et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
20140214156 | Navia et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
20140222136 | Geist et al. | Aug 2014 | A1 |
20140228946 | Chau et al. | Aug 2014 | A1 |
20140236291 | Schweich et al. | Aug 2014 | A1 |
20140257467 | Lane et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140316516 | Vidlund | Oct 2014 | A1 |
20140343669 | Lane et al. | Nov 2014 | A1 |
20140358223 | Rafiee et al. | Dec 2014 | A1 |
20140364943 | Conklin | Dec 2014 | A1 |
20150039083 | Rafiee | Feb 2015 | A1 |
20150094802 | Buchbinder et al. | Apr 2015 | A1 |
20150112433 | Schweich et al. | Apr 2015 | A1 |
20150127096 | Rowe et al. | May 2015 | A1 |
20150142103 | Vidlund | May 2015 | A1 |
20150150678 | Brecker | Jun 2015 | A1 |
20150157458 | Thambar et al. | Jun 2015 | A1 |
20150173897 | Raanani et al. | Jun 2015 | A1 |
20150196390 | Ma et al. | Jul 2015 | A1 |
20150216656 | Pintor et al. | Aug 2015 | A1 |
20150216657 | Braido | Aug 2015 | A1 |
20150216660 | Pintor et al. | Aug 2015 | A1 |
20150238312 | Lashinski | Aug 2015 | A1 |
20150238313 | Spence et al. | Aug 2015 | A1 |
20150265402 | Centola et al. | Sep 2015 | A1 |
20150320553 | Chau et al. | Nov 2015 | A1 |
20150327995 | Morin et al. | Nov 2015 | A1 |
20150327996 | Fahim et al. | Nov 2015 | A1 |
20150327999 | Board et al. | Nov 2015 | A1 |
20150335421 | Figulla et al. | Nov 2015 | A1 |
20150342733 | Alkhatib et al. | Dec 2015 | A1 |
20150351906 | Hammer et al. | Dec 2015 | A1 |
20150359629 | Ganesan et al. | Dec 2015 | A1 |
20160000564 | Buchbinder et al. | Jan 2016 | A1 |
20160008131 | Christianson et al. | Jan 2016 | A1 |
20160022417 | Karapetian et al. | Jan 2016 | A1 |
20160045307 | Yohanan et al. | Feb 2016 | A1 |
20160045309 | Valdez et al. | Feb 2016 | A1 |
20160051362 | Cooper et al. | Feb 2016 | A1 |
20160074160 | Christianson et al. | Mar 2016 | A1 |
20160106539 | Buchbinder et al. | Apr 2016 | A1 |
20160120646 | Dwork et al. | May 2016 | A1 |
20160158000 | Granada et al. | Jun 2016 | A1 |
20160158001 | Wallace et al. | Jun 2016 | A1 |
20160158003 | Wallce et al. | Jun 2016 | A1 |
20160184095 | Spence et al. | Jun 2016 | A1 |
20160193044 | Achiluzzi | Jul 2016 | A1 |
20160199180 | Zeng et al. | Jul 2016 | A1 |
20160220364 | Straubinger | Aug 2016 | A1 |
20160228251 | Nyuli et al. | Aug 2016 | A1 |
20160235529 | Ma et al. | Aug 2016 | A1 |
20160242906 | Morriss et al. | Aug 2016 | A1 |
20160270917 | Tuval et al. | Sep 2016 | A1 |
20160310268 | Oba et al. | Oct 2016 | A1 |
20160317290 | Chau et al. | Nov 2016 | A1 |
20160317304 | Spence et al. | Nov 2016 | A1 |
20160324631 | Lane et al. | Nov 2016 | A1 |
20160324633 | Gross et al. | Nov 2016 | A1 |
20160331523 | Chau et al. | Nov 2016 | A1 |
20160331531 | Quadri et al. | Nov 2016 | A1 |
20160331534 | Buchbinder et al. | Nov 2016 | A1 |
20160338826 | Chau et al. | Nov 2016 | A1 |
20160338829 | Call et al. | Nov 2016 | A1 |
20160346080 | Righini et al. | Dec 2016 | A1 |
20160354203 | Tuval et al. | Dec 2016 | A1 |
20160354204 | Braido et al. | Dec 2016 | A1 |
20160361162 | Richter et al. | Dec 2016 | A1 |
20160361163 | Yohanan et al. | Dec 2016 | A1 |
20160374801 | Jiminez et al. | Dec 2016 | A1 |
20170007398 | Drews et al. | Jan 2017 | A1 |
20170049564 | Board et al. | Feb 2017 | A1 |
20170056162 | Harewood | Mar 2017 | A1 |
20170056163 | Tayeb et al. | Mar 2017 | A1 |
20170056166 | Ratz et al. | Mar 2017 | A1 |
20170056176 | Rowe et al. | Mar 2017 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
350302 | Jan 1990 | EP |
0592410 | Apr 1994 | EP |
592410 | Apr 1994 | EP |
705081 | Oct 2001 | EP |
1338255 | Aug 2003 | EP |
825841 | Oct 2003 | EP |
833595 | Oct 2003 | EP |
910313 | Nov 2003 | EP |
910314 | Nov 2003 | EP |
0910314 | Nov 2003 | EP |
1006949 | Oct 2004 | EP |
1233731 | Dec 2004 | EP |
1251803 | Jun 2005 | EP |
2674130 | Jun 2005 | EP |
1267753 | Oct 2005 | EP |
830112 | Nov 2005 | EP |
1171059 | Nov 2005 | EP |
1328215 | Nov 2005 | EP |
1318775 | Nov 2006 | EP |
1474077 | Feb 2007 | EP |
1143882 | Dec 2007 | EP |
1180987 | Aug 2008 | EP |
1237509 | Dec 2008 | EP |
1562522 | Dec 2008 | EP |
2000115 | Dec 2008 | EP |
1330213 | Mar 2009 | EP |
1610727 | Apr 2009 | EP |
1343438 | Jul 2009 | EP |
2078498 | Jul 2009 | EP |
1684667 | Aug 2009 | EP |
1408850 | Sep 2009 | EP |
1653888 | Sep 2009 | EP |
1049425 | Nov 2009 | EP |
1703865 | Feb 2010 | EP |
1682048 | Mar 2010 | EP |
1509171 | Jun 2010 | EP |
1968491 | Jul 2010 | EP |
1176913 | Oct 2010 | EP |
1465554 | Dec 2010 | EP |
1940321 | Dec 2010 | EP |
2258312 | Dec 2010 | EP |
1441672 | Sep 2011 | EP |
2160150 | Oct 2011 | EP |
1603493 | Dec 2011 | EP |
2399549 | Dec 2011 | EP |
2399550 | Dec 2011 | EP |
1788984 | Feb 2012 | EP |
2055266 | Feb 2012 | EP |
2420205 | Feb 2012 | EP |
1621162 | May 2012 | EP |
2138132 | Jun 2012 | EP |
2476394 | Jul 2012 | EP |
2124824 | Oct 2012 | EP |
2088965 | Nov 2012 | EP |
2526895 | Nov 2012 | EP |
2526898 | Nov 2012 | EP |
2526899 | Nov 2012 | EP |
2529696 | Dec 2012 | EP |
2529697 | Dec 2012 | EP |
2529698 | Dec 2012 | EP |
2529699 | Dec 2012 | EP |
2537487 | Dec 2012 | EP |
1919397 | Jan 2013 | EP |
2015709 | Jan 2013 | EP |
1750622 | Feb 2013 | EP |
2257242 | Feb 2013 | EP |
2260796 | Feb 2013 | EP |
1701668 | Mar 2013 | EP |
2260797 | Mar 2013 | EP |
2340075 | Mar 2013 | EP |
2260798 | Jun 2013 | EP |
2626040 | Aug 2013 | EP |
1758523 | Sep 2013 | EP |
2073756 | Oct 2013 | EP |
2109417 | Nov 2013 | EP |
2477555 | Dec 2013 | EP |
1838241 | Feb 2014 | EP |
1926455 | Apr 2014 | EP |
2405966 | Apr 2014 | EP |
2257243 | May 2014 | EP |
2316381 | May 2014 | EP |
2745805 | Jun 2014 | EP |
2117469 | Jul 2014 | EP |
2124826 | Jul 2014 | EP |
2258316 | Jul 2014 | EP |
2749254 | Jul 2014 | EP |
1667604 | Aug 2014 | EP |
2211779 | Aug 2014 | EP |
2772228 | Sep 2014 | EP |
2142143 | Nov 2014 | EP |
2815723 | Dec 2014 | EP |
2815724 | Dec 2014 | EP |
2815725 | Dec 2014 | EP |
2254515 | Jan 2015 | EP |
1465555 | May 2015 | EP |
2068767 | Jul 2015 | EP |
1702247 | Aug 2015 | EP |
1729688 | Aug 2015 | EP |
2262447 | Aug 2015 | EP |
2901966 | Aug 2015 | EP |
1804686 | Sep 2015 | EP |
2675396 | Sep 2015 | EP |
1734903 | Oct 2015 | EP |
2254513 | Oct 2015 | EP |
2544626 | Oct 2015 | EP |
2926766 | Oct 2015 | EP |
2926767 | Oct 2015 | EP |
1748745 | Dec 2015 | EP |
1755459 | Dec 2015 | EP |
1850796 | Dec 2015 | EP |
1991168 | Jan 2016 | EP |
2254512 | Jan 2016 | EP |
2263609 | Jan 2016 | EP |
2012712 | Feb 2016 | EP |
1585463 | Mar 2016 | EP |
2170416 | Mar 2016 | EP |
2278944 | Mar 2016 | EP |
1871300 | Apr 2016 | EP |
2572676 | Apr 2016 | EP |
2626041 | Apr 2016 | EP |
2237746 | May 2016 | EP |
2582326 | May 2016 | EP |
2618784 | May 2016 | EP |
1734902 | Jun 2016 | EP |
1906884 | Jun 2016 | EP |
2190379 | Jun 2016 | EP |
2416739 | Jun 2016 | EP |
2572675 | Jun 2016 | EP |
WO 2011119101 | Sep 2011 | WO |
WO 2012103204 | Aug 2012 | WO |
WO 2015061463 | Apr 2015 | WO |
Entry |
---|
US 9,532,869, 01/2017, Quadri et al. (withdrawn) |
Supplementary European Search Report in Eurpoean Application No. 13778768, dated Jan. 12, 2016, 7 pages. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion in International Application No. PCT/US2015/056935, dated Feb. 12, 2016, 14 pages. |
U.S. Appl. No. 61/266,774, filed Dec. 16, 2009, Chau et al. |
U.S. Appl. No. 61/287,099, filed Dec. 4, 2009, Chau et al. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability in International Application No. PCT/US2015/035303, dated Dec. 15, 2016, 10 pages. |
European Search Report in European Application No. 15807060.7, dated Jun. 6, 2017, 7 pages. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion in International Application No. PCT/US2016/069201, dated Apr. 28, 2017, 12 pages. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20150359629 A1 | Dec 2015 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
62011164 | Jun 2014 | US |