Five Year Results of Endovascular versus Medical Therapy in Acute Type B Aortic Intramural Haematoma: Meta-Analysis of Reconstructed Time to Event Data.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate outcomes in the follow up of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) vs. medical therapy in patients with acute type B aortic intramural haematoma (IMH). DATA SOURCES: The following sources were searched for articles meeting the inclusion criteria and published by July 2023: PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL/CCTR (Cochrane Controlled Trials Register). REVIEW METHODS: This systematic review with pooled meta-analysis of time to event data followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guidelines, and its protocol was registered on the public platform PROSPERO (CRD42023456222). The following were analysed: overall survival (all cause mortality), aortic related mortality, and restricted mean survival time. Certainty of evidence was evaluated through the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) tool. RESULTS: Eight studies met the eligibility criteria, including 1 015 patients (440 in the TEVAR group and 575 in the medical therapy group). All studies were observational, and the pooled cohort had a median follow up of 5.1 years. Compared with patients who received medical therapy alone, those who underwent TEVAR had a statistically significantly lower risk of all cause death (HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.30 - 0.65; p < .001; GRADE certainty: low), lower risk of aortic related death (HR 0.04, 95% CI 0.01 - 0.31; p = .002; GRADE certainty: low) and lifetime gain (restricted mean survival time was overall 201 days longer with TEVAR; p < .001). CONCLUSION: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair may be associated with lower risk of all cause and aortic related death compared with medical therapy in patients with acute type B IMH; however, the underlying data are not strong enough to draw robust clinical conclusions. Randomised controlled trials with large sample sizes and longer follow up are warranted to elucidate this question.

Long-term outcomes of total arch replacement with bilateral antegrade cerebral perfusion using the "arch first" approach.

OBJECTIVE: To report outcomes of total arch replacement (TAR) with hypothermic circulatory arrest and bilateral antegrade cerebral perfusion (bACP) using an "arch first" approach for acute Type A aortic dissection (ATAAD). The "arch first" approach involved revascularization of the aortic arch branch vessels with uninterrupted ACP, before lower body circulatory arrest, while the patient was cooling. METHODS: This was an observational study of aortic surgeries from 2010 to 2021. All patients who underwent TAR with bACP for ATAAD were included. Short-term and long-term outcomes were reported utilizing descriptive statistics and Kaplan-Meier survival estimation. RESULTS: A total of 215 patients were identified who underwent TAR + bACP for ATAAD. Age was 59.0 [49.0-67.0] years and 35.3% were female. 73 patients (34.0%) underwent a concomitant aortic root replacement, 188 (87.4%) had aortic cannulation, circulatory arrest time was 37.0 [26.0-52.0] minutes, and nadir temperature was 20.8 [19.4-22.5] degrees Celsius. 35 patients (16.3%) had operative mortality (STS definition), 17 (7.9%) had a new stroke, 79 (36.7%) had prolonged mechanical ventilation (>24 h), 35 (16.3%) had acute renal failure (by RIFLE criteria), and 128 (59.5%) had blood product transfusions. One-year survival was 77.1%, while 5-years survival was 67.1%. During follow-up, there were 23 (10.7%) reinterventions involving the descending thoracic aorta - either thoracic endovascular aortic repair or open thoracoabdominal aortic replacement. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with ATAAD, short-term postoperative outcomes after TAR + bACP using the "arch first" approach are acceptable. Moreover, this operative strategy may furnish long-term durability, with a reasonably low reintervention rate and satisfactory overall survival.

Extracorporeal life support after surgical repair for acute type a aortic dissection: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The use of extracorporeal life support (ECLS) in patients after surgical repair for acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD) has not been well documented. METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the outcomes of ECLS after surgery for ATAAD with data published by October 2023 in compliance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) and the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) reporting guidelines. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023479955). RESULTS: Twelve observational studies met our eligibility criteria, including 280 patients. Mean age was 55.0 years and women represented 25.3% of the overall population. Although the mean preoperative left ventricle ejection fraction was 59.8%, 60.8% of patients developed left ventricle failure and 34.0% developed biventricular failure. Coronary involvement and malperfusion were found in 37.1% and 25.6%, respectively. Concomitant coronary bypass surgery was performed in 38.5% of patients. Regarding ECLS, retrograde flow (femoral) was present in 39.9% and central cannulation was present in 35.4%. In-hospital mortality was 62.8% and pooled estimate of successful weaning was 50.8%. Neurological complications, bleeding and renal failure were found in 25.9%, 38.7%, and 65.5%, respectively. CONCLUSION: ECLS after surgical repair for ATAAD remains associated with high rates of in-hospital death and complications, but it still represents a chance of survival in critical situations. ECLS remains a salvage attempt and surgeons should not try to avoid ECLS at all costs after repairing an ATAAD case.

Cusp-overlap versus coplanar view in transcatheter aortic valve implantation with self-expandable valves: A meta-analysis of comparative studies.

BACKGROUND: Permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) is a common complication after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). The cusp-overlap view (COV) was adopted to reduce PPI risk after TAVI with self-expandable valves (SEVs); however, the evidence remains scarce. We performed a systematic review with meta-analysis comparing COV and the standard coplanar view (CPV) technique to evaluate their effectiveness and safety. METHODS: Following the PRISMA statement, data were extracted from studies published by August 2022 and found in PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL/CCTR, ClinicalTrials.gov, SciELO, LILACS, and Google Scholar. The primary outcome of interest was post-procedural PPI and the secondary outcomes were new left bundle branch block (LBBB), moderate/severe paravalvular leak (PVL), valve dislocation (pop-out); need of second transcatheter heart valve, 30-day mortality, stroke, conversion to surgery, coronary obstruction, implantation depth (mm), and post-TAVI mean gradients (mmHg). RESULTS: Eleven studies met our eligibility criteria and included 1464 patients in the COV group and 1743 patients in the CPV group. Patients who underwent TAVI with COV had lower risk of PPI (odds ratio 0.48; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.33-0.70; p = 0.001) and higher implantation depths with COV (mean difference -0.83; 95% CI -1.2 to -0.45; p < 0.001). We did not observe any statistically significant differences in the rates of new LBBB, moderate/severe PVL, valve dislocation, need of second transcatheter heart valve, 30-day mortality, stroke, conversion to surgery, coronary obstruction, and post-TAVI mean gradients (mmHg). CONCLUSION: In TAVI with SEVs, the application of COV is associated with lower risk of PPI compared with the standard CPV without increasing risk for adverse outcomes.

Computed tomography-derived membranous septum length as predictor of conduction abnormalities and permanent pacemaker implantation after TAVI: A meta-analysis of observational studies.

BACKGROUND: Permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is associated with higher risk of mortality and rehospitalization for heart failure. Efforts to prevent conduction abnormalities (CA) requiring PPI after TAVI should be made. The membranous septum (MS) length and its interaction with implantation depth (ID-ΔMSID) could provide useful information about the risk of CA/PPI following TAVI. OBJECTIVES: To identify MS length and ΔMSID as predictors of CA/PPI following TAVI. METHODS: Study-level meta-analysis of studies published by September 30, 2022. RESULTS: Eighteen studies met our eligibility including 5740 patients. Shorter MS length was associated with a significantly higher risk of CA/PPI (per 1 mm decrease: odds ratio [OR] 1.60, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.28-1.99, p < 0.001). Similarly, lower ΔMSID was associated with a significantly higher risk of CA/PPI (per 1 mm decrease: OR 1.75, 95% CI 1.32-2.31, p < 0.001). Meta-regression analyses revealed a statistically significant modulation of the effect of shorter MS length and lower ΔMSID on the outcome (CA/PPI) by balloon postdilatation (positive regression coefficients with p < 0.001); with increasing use of balloon postdilatation, the effect of shorter MS length and lower ΔMSID on the outcome increased. MS length and ΔMSID demonstrated excellent discriminative abilities, with diagnostic ORs equaling 9.49 (95% CI 4.73-19.06), and 7.19 (95% CI 3.31-15.60), respectively. CONCLUSION: Considering that short MS length and low ΔMSID are associated with higher risk of CA and PPI, we should include measurement of MS length in the pre-TAVI planning with MDCT and try to establish optimal ID values before the procedure to avoid CA/PPI.

Long-Term Outcomes of Open Versus Endovascular Treatment for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis With Reconstructed Time-to-Event Data.

BACKGROUND: The advent of endovascular techniques has revolutionized the care of patients with uncomplicated abdominal aortic aneurysms. This analysis compares the overall survival and the freedom from reintervention rate between open surgical repair (OSR) and endovascular repair (EVAR) in patients undergoing elective abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair. METHODS: PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane databases were searched for studies including patients who underwent either OSR or EVAR for uncomplicated AAA. All randomized controlled trials and propensity-score-matched cohort studies reporting on the outcomes of interest were considered eligible for inclusion. The systematic search of the literature was performed by 2 independent investigators in accordance with the recommendations of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement. We conducted 1-stage and 2-stage meta-analyses with Kaplan-Meier-derived time-to-event data and meta-analysis with a random-effects model. RESULTS: Thirteen studies met our eligibility criteria, incorporating 13 409 and 13 450 patients in the OSR and EVAR arms, respectively. Patients who underwent open repair had improved overall survival rates compared with those who underwent EVAR (hazard ratio [HR]=0.93, 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.88-0.98, p=0.004) during a mean follow-up of 53.8 (SD=29.8) months and this was validated by the 2-stage meta-analysis (HR=0.89, 95% CI=0.8-0.99, p=0.03, I2=62.25%). Splitting timepoint analysis suggested that EVAR offers better survival outcome compared with OSR in the first 11 months following elective intervention (HR=1.37, 95% CI=1.22-1.54, p<0.0001), while OSR offers a significant survival advantage after the 11-month timepoint and up to 180 months (HR=0.84, 95% CI=0.8-0.89, p<0.0001). Similarly, freedom from reintervention was found to be significantly better in EVAR patients (HR=1.28, 95% CI=1.14-1.44, p<0.0001) within the first 30 days. After the first month postrepair, however, OSR demonstrated higher freedom-from-reintervention rates compared with EVAR that remained significant for up to 168 months during follow-up (HR=0.73, 95% CI=0.66-0.79, p<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the first-year survival advantage of EVAR in patients undergoing elective AAA repair, OSR was associated with a late survival benefit and decreased risk for reintervention in long-term follow-up. CLINICAL IMPACT: Open surgical repair for uncomplicated abdominal aortic aneurysm offers better long-term outcomes in terms of survival and freedom from reintervention rate compared to the endovascular approach but in the first year it carries a higher risk of mortality. The novelty of our study lies that instead of comparing study-level effect estimates, we analyzed reconstructed individual patient-level data. This offered us the opportunity to perform our analyses with mathematically robust and flexible survival models, which was proved to be crucial since there was evidence of different hazard over time. Our findings underline the need for additional investigation to clarify the significance of open surgical repair when compared to the latest endovascular devices and techniques within the evolving era of minimally invasive procedures.

Midterm Outcomes of Endovascular vs. Medical Therapy for Uncomplicated Type B Aortic Dissection: Meta-Analysis of Reconstructed Time to Event Data.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) vs. medical therapy in uncomplicated type B aortic dissections (TBAD). DATA SOURCES: PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, SciELO, LILACS, CENTRAL/CCTR, Google Scholar, and reference lists of relevant articles. REVIEW METHODS: This was a pooled meta-analysis of time to event data extracted from studies published by December 2022 for the following outcomes: all cause mortality, aortic related mortality, and late aortic interventions. Certainty of evidence was evaluated through the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) tool. RESULTS: Ten studies met the eligibility criteria (eight observational; two randomised trials), comprising 17 906 patients (2 332 patients in the TEVAR groups and 15 574 patients in the medical therapy group). Compared with patients who received medical therapy, patients who underwent TEVAR had a statistically significantly lower risk of all cause death (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.72 - 0.87, p < .001; GRADE certainty: low) and lower risk of aortic related death (HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.30 - 0.62, p < .001; GRADE certainty: low) without statistically significant difference in the risk of late aortic interventions (HR 1.05, 95% CI 0.88 - 1.26, p = .56; GRADE certainty: low). In the subgroup analyses, TEVAR was associated with lower risk of all cause death when randomised controlled trials only were pooled (HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.23 - 0.83, p = .012; GRADE certainty: moderate), younger patients only (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.47 - 0.67, p < .001; GRADE certainty: low), Western populations only (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.77 - 0.93, p = .001; GRADE certainty: low) and non-Western populations only (HR 0.47, 95% CI 0.35 - 0.62, p < .001; GRADE certainty: low). For all cause mortality and aortic related mortality, restricted mean survival time was overall 396 days and 398 days longer with TEVAR (p < .001), respectively, which means that TEVAR was associated with lifetime gain. CONCLUSION: TEVAR may be associated with better midterm survival and lower risk of aortic related death in the follow up of patients treated for uncomplicated TBAD compared with medical therapy; however, randomised controlled trials with larger sample sizes and longer follow up are still warranted.

Clinical outcomes of different revascularization approaches for patients with multi-vessel coronary artery disease: A network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: As surgical techniques continue to evolve, the optimal approach for revascularizing multi-vessel coronary artery disease (CAD) remains a matter of ongoing debate. Accordingly, our objective was to compare and contrast various surgical techniques utilized in the management of multi-vessel CAD. METHODS: A systematic literature review was performed using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane central register of controlled trials from inception to May 2022. Random-effects network meta-analysis was performed for the primary outcome; target vessel revascularization (TVR), and secondary outcomes; mortality, major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events, postoperative myocardial infarction, new-onset atrial fibrillation, stroke, new-onset dialysis, in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with a stent, off-pump coronary bypass graft, on-pump coronary artery bypass graft (ONCABG), hybrid coronary revascularization, minimally-invasive coronary artery bypass, or robot-assisted coronary artery bypass (RCAB) surgeries. RESULTS: A total of 8841 patients were included from 23 studies. The analysis showed that ONCABG had the highest freedom from TVR, with a mean (SD) absolute risk of 0.027 (0.029); although ONCABG was found to be superior to all other methods, it was only significantly better than first-generation stent PCI. While RCAB did not demonstrate significant superiority over other treatments, it showed a greater probability of preventing postoperative complications. Notably, no significant heterogeneity was calculated for any of the reported outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: ONCABG shows a better rank probability compared to all other techniques for preventing TVR, while RCAB offers greater freedom from most postoperative complications. However, given the absence of randomized controlled trials, these results should be interpreted with caution.

Early and late outcomes of surgical aortic valve replacement with sutureless and rapid-deployment valves versus transcatheter aortic valve implantation: Meta-analysis with reconstructed time-to-event data of matched studies.

Sutureless/rapid-deployment (SURD) valves are options different from the stented prostheses included in the pivotal trials comparing surgical aortic valve replacement (AVR) and transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). We performed a meta-analysis with reconstructed time-to-event data of matched studies published by November 2021 to compare SURD-AVR and TAVI. Primary endpoints were 30-day mortality and overall survival in the follow-up. Secondary endpoints included: 30-day stroke, acute kidney injury (AKI), major bleeding, permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI), paravalvular leak (PVL), prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM), postoperative aortic valve area (AVA), and mean gradients. Ten studies met our eligibility criteria, including a total of 5134 patients (2567 underwent SURD-AVR and 2567 underwent TAVI). Pooled risk of 30-day mortality did not favor any group (odds ratio [OR]: 0.69; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.31-1.53; p = 0.360). Patients undergoing SURD-AVR had lower risk of PVL (OR: 0.09; 95% CI: 0.05-0.17; p < 0.001). No statistically significant differences were observed for 30-day stroke, AKI, major bleeding, PPI, PPM, and postoperative AVA. In the follow-up, we observed a higher risk of mortality (hazard ratio: 1.74; 95% CI: 1.26-2.40; p < 0.001) with TAVI. Patients who underwent SURD-AVR experienced better survival, however, the interpretation of these results warrant caution due to the fact that SURD-AVR patients tended to be younger than TAVI patients. Structural heart surgeons and interventional cardiologists should consider initial risk and life expectancy when referring patients for one approach over the other.

Initial experience with CytoSorb therapy in patients receiving left ventricular assist devices.

BACKGROUND: The use of left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) in patients with advance heart failure is still associated with an important risk of immune dysregulation and infections. The aim of this study was to determine whether extracorporeal blood purification using the CytoSorb device benefits patients after LVAD implantation in terms of complications and overall survival. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between August 2010 and January 2020, 207 consecutive patients underwent LVAD implantation, of whom 72 underwent CytoSorb therapy and 135 did not. Overall survival, major adverse events, and laboratory parameters were compared between 112 propensity score-matched patients (CytoSorb: 72 patients; non-CytoSorb: 40 patients). RESULTS: WBC (p = .033), CRP (p = .001), and IL-6 (p < .001), significantly increased with LVAD implantation, while CytoSorb did not influence this response. In-hospital mortality and overall survival during follow-up were similar with CytoSorb. However, patients treated with CytoSorb were more likely to develop respiratory failure (54.2% vs. 30.0%, p = .024), need mechanical ventilation for longer than 6 days post-implant (50.0% vs. 27.5%, p = .035), and require tracheostomy during hospitalization (31.9% vs. 12.5%, p = .040). No other significant differences were observed with regard to major adverse events during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, our results showed that CytoSorb might not convey a significant morbidity or mortality benefit for patients undergoing LVAD implantation.

Late Outcomes After Aortic Root Enlargement During Aortic Valve Replacement: Meta-Analysis With Reconstructed Time-To-Event Data.

OBJECTIVES: The present authors aimed to assess the late outcomes of patients undergoing aortic root enlargement (ARE) at the time of surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). DESIGN: Study-level meta-analysis with reconstructed time-to-event data. SETTING: Follow-up of patients after surgical procedure. PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients with aortic valve disease requiring surgery. INTERVENTIONS: SAVR with ARE versus SAVR without ARE. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses reporting guideline. The following databases were searched for studies meeting the authors' inclusion criteria and published by November 30, 2021: PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, SciELO, LILACS, CCTR/CENTRAL, and Google Scholar. Nine nonrandomized studies met the authors' eligibility criteria. All studies were nonrandomized. A total of 213,134 patients (SAVR with ARE: 7,556 patients; SAVR without ARE: 205,578 patients) were included from studies published from 1997 to 2021. The total rate of AAE was 3.7%, varying in the studies from 2.9% to 28.1%. The studies consisted of patients whose mean age varied from 63 to 79 years. Patients in the SAVR with ARE group had a significantly better overall survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0.94, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.90-0.99, p = 0.016) in the unmatched populations, but the matched analysis revealed no difference between SAVR with/without ARE in terms of overall survival (HR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.90-1.25; p = 0.474). CONCLUSIONS: In the context of patients undergoing SAVR with or without ARE, patients who undergo ARE do not experience worse late outcomes. Further randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm or refute the authors' current findings.

Sternal-sparing aortic valve replacement with sutureless valve in bicuspid valve.

Over the last decade, sutureless valves (Perceval, LivaNova PLC) were brought to the market as an alternative to stented valves for patients requiring surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). However, Perceval demands special steps for implantation, among which we can mention specific training for the surgical team members. Sternal-sparing cardiac procedures are conceived to limit surgical trauma, but the technical requirements and preoperative planning are more challenging than those for conventional sternotomy. SAVR is frequently carried out through an upper hemisternotomy, but the right anterior thoracotomy (RAT) represents an even less traumatic, technical advancement. In the context of SAVR with RAT, Perceval has been considered the "perfect marriage." In patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV), some surgeons initially avoided the Perceval valve but, with growing experience, the prosthesis has been used for a wide variety of indications. According to an international consensus statement recently published, there are 3 BAV types: the fused BAV, the 2-sinus BAV and the partial-fusion BAV, each with specific phenotypes. The 2-sinus BAV has 2 cusps, roughly equal in size and shape, each cusp occupying 180° of the annular circumference, with only 2 aortic sinuses, resulting in a 2-sinus/2-cusp valve without raphe and with 180° commissural angles. Since the elliptic aortic annulus in BAV patients poses a challenge for sutureless valves and the RAT approach has been increasingly adopted for minimally invasive SAVR, our description of the surgical technique focuses on the specific procedural details in the scenario of 2-sinus BAV laterolateral phenotype.

Specific causes of death among patients with cardiac sarcoma in the United States-An analysis of The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program.

Representing 10%-25% of the primary cardiac neoplasms, primary malignant cardiac tumors (PMCT) have a poor prognosis, yet with rare incidence. Constituting more than 50% of the PMCT, cardiac sarcoma has increased not only in incidence over the past five decades but also in severity. Patients with PMCTs, especially sarcomas, have the worst prognosis when compared with other cardiac or extracardiac tumors. This retrospective study was performed using SEER*stat software, latest version 8.3.9.2(5) by accessing seer 18 registries plus data (excl AK) Nov 2020 Sub (2000-2018) for standard mortality ratio (SMR). A total of 235 patients were identified of whom 49.4% were females. Most of our patients were Stage 4 (n = 81) and distant in location (n = 92). The most common treatment method was tumor-directed surgery (n = 164), chemotherapy (n = 146), and radiotherapy (n = 55). Furthermore, other associated cancers with cardiac sarcoma were rare, with ten cases with lung and bronchus cancer (SMR: 37.95, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 18.2, 69.8), four with bone and joints (SMR: 1726.05, 95% CI: 470.2, 4419.3). During a 5-year follow-up, 235 patients died primarily due to cardiac sarcoma (n = 182, 77.4%), other cancers (n = 34, 14.4%), and other noncancerous causes (n = 19, 8%), while the noncancerous causes were attributed mainly to cardiovascular diseases (n = 4, 21%, SMR: 4.95, 95% CI: 1.35, 12.67), septicemia (n = 2, 10.5%, SMR: 41.23, 95% CI: 4.99, 148.95).

Impact of left ventricle outflow tract calcification on the outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve implantation: A study-level meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the impact of left ventricle outflow tract calcification (LVOT) on the outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). METHODS: Meta-analysis including studies published by October 2021. Primary endpoints were operative and 1-year mortality. The secondary endpoints were stroke, myocardial infarction, paravalvular leakage (PVL), new permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI), aortic annulus/root rupture. RESULTS: Nine studies met our eligibility criteria, including a total of 4459 patients (1330 patients with significant LVOT calcification and 3129 patients without significant LVOT calcification). Pooled risk of operative death was higher in the group with significant LVOT calcification (odds ratio [OR]: 2.28; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.33-3.91; p < .001). Worse 1-year survival was observed in the group with LVOT calcification (hazard ratio 1.53, 95% CI: 1.26-1.87, p < .001). Patients with significant LVOT calcification had higher risk of stroke (OR: 1.83; 95% CI: 1.08-3.09; p = .032), myocardial infarction (OR: 1.74; 95% CI: 1.08-2.80; p = .034), PVL (OR: 1.88; 95% CI: 1.09-3.22; p = .028) and aortic annulus/root rupture (OR: 7.48; 95% CI: 3.58-15.65; p = .002). We did not observe a statistically significant difference in the pooled results for new PPI between the groups (OR: 1.19; 95% CI: 0.79-1.80; p = .337). CONCLUSION: The presence of significant LVOT calcification increases the risk of periprocedural and 1-year mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction, PVL and aortic annulus/root rupture after TAVI. Self-expandable valves may be a preferrable option in this scenario. Structural heart surgeons and interventional cardiologists should consider this factor when referring patients for TAVI and technical aspects (such as the type of transcatheter heart valve to be deployed or the use of pre-/post-dilatation) should be factored in.

Hybrid robotic off-pump versus conventional on-pump and off-pump coronary artery bypass graft surgery in women.

OBJECTIVE: To compare outcomes of three methods of coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG): robotic off-pump hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) versus conventional CABG off-pump (off-pump coronary artery bypass [OPCAB]) and on-pump (on-pump coronary artery bypass [ONCAB]) in women. METHODS: Data on women who underwent robotic off-pump HCR or conventional OPCAB or conventional ONCAB between May 2005 and January 2021 were collected. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) with doubly robust method was used to analyze the data. RESULTS: A total of 731 women were included (181 robotic off-pump HCR, 138 conventional ONCAB, and 412 conventional OPCAB cases). IPTW-adjusted analyses revealed the following: (1) for operative times, robotic off-pump HCR presented longer times when compared with OPCAB, but shorter times when compared with ONCAB; (2) compared with ONCAB and OPCAB, robotic off-pump HCR presented lower rates of reintervention for bleeding, intra- and postoperative blood transfusions, higher rates of extubation in the OR with less prolonged ventilation, lower rates of postoperative atrial fibrillation, and shorter intensive care unit and hospital length of stay; (3) no statistically significant differences for operative mortality were observed comparing robotic off-pump HCR with ONCAB (IPTW-adjusted odds ratio [OR]: 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.07-7.85; p = .822) and with OPCAB (IPTW-adjusted OR: 4.27; 95% CI: 0.27-66.88; p = .301); 4. long-term survival was similar with HCR compared with ONCAB (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.36-1.50, p = .401) and OPCAB (HR: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.50-1.58, p = .683). CONCLUSIONS: In our local experience, robotic off-pump HCR in women was as safe as conventional ONCAB and OPCAB and may further improve postoperative outcomes when performed frequently by a dedicated team, producing better perioperative outcomes without compromising survival in the long run.

Robotic hybrid coronary revascularization versus conventional off-pump coronary bypass surgery in women with two-vessel disease.

BACKGROUND: Hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) treats coronary artery disease (CAD) by combining a minimally invasive surgical approach with the left internal mammary artery (LIMA) to the left anterior descending (LAD) artery and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for non-LAD vessels. This study aimed to compare immediate and long-term outcomes between robotic HCR and off-pump coronary artery bypass (OPCAB) via sternotomy in women with two-vessel CAD. METHODS AND RESULTS: We compared all robotic HCR (LIMA-to-LAD plus stent; n = 55) and OPCAB (LIMA-to-LAD plus saphenous vein graft; n = 54) performed at a single institution between May 2005 and January 2021. To adjust for the selection bias of receiving either HCR or OPCAB, we performed a propensity score analysis of 31 matched pairs. In the immediate postoperative period, no statistically significant difference was observed for operative mortality and HCR was associated with lower rates of blood transfusion (25.8% vs. 54.8%; p = .038), and shorter hospital length of stay (4.0 vs. 6.0 days; p = .009). After a mean follow-up of 7.0 ± 4.9 years, we observed no statistically significant differences between the groups for overall survival (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.48, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.09-2.64, p = .401), myocardial infarction (HR: 1.60, 95% CI: 0.14-17.64, p = .703), stroke (HR not assessable; almost zero events), target vessel revascularization (HR: 0.45, 95% CI: 0.08-2.47, p = .359), angina (HR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.20-2.01, p = .444) and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (HR: 0.46, 95% CI: 0.14-1.52, p = .202). CONCLUSIONS: Robotic HCR provides for women with two-vessel CAD a shorter postoperative recovery with fewer blood transfusions, with similar long-term outcomes when compared with conventional OPCAB via sternotomy.

Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass graft surgery in dialysis-dependent patients: A pooled meta-analysis of reconstructed time-to-event data.

OBJECTIVE: Το perform a systematic review with meta-analysis of published data comparing outcomes between a percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in dialysis-dependent patients. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane databases for studies including dialysis-dependent patients who underwent either CABG or PCI. This meta-analysis follows the recommendations of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. We conducted one-stage and two-stage meta-analysis with Kaplan-Meier-derived individual patient data for overall survival and meta-analysis with the random-effects model for the in-hospital mortality and repeat revascularization. RESULTS: Twelve studies met our eligibility criteria, including 13,651 and 28,493 patients were identified in the CABG and PCI arms, respectively. Patients who underwent CABG had overall improved survival compared with those who underwent PCI at the one-stage meta-analysis (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.12, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.09-1.16, p < .0001) and the two-stage meta-analysis (HR: 1.15, 95% CI: 1.08-1.23, p < .001, I2 = 30.0%). Landmark analysis suggested that PCI offers better survival before the 8.5 months of follow-up (HR: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.92-0.99, p = .043), while CABG offers an advantage after this timepoint (HR: 1.3, 95% CI: 1.22-1.32, p < .001). CABG was associated with increased odds for in-hospital mortality (odds ratio [OR]: 1.70, 95% CI: 1.50-1.92, p < .001, I2 = 0.0%) and decreased odds for repeat revascularization (OR: 0.22, 95% CI: 0.14-0.34, p < .001, I2 = 58.08%). CONCLUSIONS: In dialysis-dependent patients, CABG was associated with long-term survival but a higher risk for early mortality. The risk for repeat revascularization was higher with PCI.

Complete transcatheter versus complete surgical treatment in patients with aortic valve stenosis and concomitant coronary artery disease: Study-level meta-analysis with reconstructed time-to-event data.

OBJECTIVES: To compare outcomes of complete transcatheter (TAVI plus PCI) versus complete surgical (SAVR plus CABG) approach to treat patients with aortic stenosis (AS) and concomitant coronary artery disease (CAD). METHODS: Study-level meta-analysis with reconstructed time-to-event data including studies published by November 2021. The primary endpoints were 30-day mortality, overall survival, and major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE). The secondary endpoints were 30-day stroke, myocardial infarction, and permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI); in-hospital major vascular events and acute kidney injury (AKI). RESULTS: Eight studies met our eligibility criteria, including a total of 33,286 patients (3448 for TAVI plus PCI and 29,838 for SAVR plus CABG). The pooled risk of 30-day mortality was lower for TAVI plus PCI (OR 0.63; 95% CI 0.51-0.80; p < .001). Patients undergoing TAVI plus PCI had lower risk of in-hospital AKI (OR 0.49; 95% CI 0.28-0.85; p = .01), however, higher risk of major vascular events (OR 7.33; 95% CI 1.80-29.85; p = .005) and higher risk of PPI (OR 2.96; 95% CI 1.80-4.85; p < .001). No statistically significant difference was observed for myocardial infarction and stroke between the groups. In the follow-up analyses, we observed a higher risk of mortality (HR 1.64, 95% CI 1.36-1.96, p < .001) and MACCE with TAVI plus PCI (HR 1.35 (95% CI 1.08-1.69, p = .009). CONCLUSION: Patients who undergo TAVI plus PCI (in comparison with SAVR plus CABG) initially experience lower rates of in-hospital death and AKI; however, they experience significantly lower survival rates and more MACCE at 5-year follow up. Structural heart surgeons and interventional cardiologists should consider these aspects when referring patients for one approach or the other.

Lifetime management of aortic valve disease: Aligning surgical and transcatheter armamentarium to set the tone for the present and the future.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has already received the green light for high-, intermediate- and low-risk profiles and is an alternative for all patients regardless of age. It is clear that there has been a push towards the use of TAVR in younger and younger patients (<65 years), which has never been formally tested in randomized controlled trials but seems inevitable as TAVR technology makes steady progress. Lifetime management as a concept will set the tone in the field of the structural heart. Some subjects in this scenario arise, including the importance of optimized prosthetic hemodynamics for lifetime care; surgical procedures in the aortic root; management of structural valve degeneration with valve-in-valve procedures (TAVR-in-surgical aortic valve replacement [SAVR] and TAVR-in-TAVR) and redo SAVR; commissural alignment and cusp overlap for TAVR; the rise in the number of surgical procedures for TAVR explantation; and the renewed interest in the Ross procedure. This article reviews all these issues which will become commonplace during heart team meetings and preoperative conversations with patients in the coming years.

Immediate and late outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve implantation versus surgical aortic valve replacement in bicuspid valves: Meta-analysis of reconstructed time-to-event data.

BACKGROUND: Outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) versus surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients with aortic stenosis and bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) must be better investigated. METHODS: A meta-analysis including studies published by January 2022 reporting immediate outcomes (in-hospital death, stroke, acute kidney injury [AKI], major bleeding, new permanent pacemaker implantation [PPI], paravalvular leakage [PVL]), mortality in the follow-up (with Kaplan-Meier curves for reconstruction of individual patient data). RESULTS: Five studies met our eligibility criteria. No statistically significant difference was observed for in-hospital death, stroke, AKI, and PVL. TAVI was associated with lower risk of major bleeding (odds ratio [OR]: 0.29; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.12-0.69; p = .025), but higher risk of PPI (OR: 2.00; 95% CI: 1.05-3.77; p = .041). In the follow-up, mortality after TAVI was significantly higher in the analysis with the largest samples (HR: 1.24, 95% CI: 1.01-1.53, p = .043), but no statistically significant difference was observed with risk-adjusted populations (HR: 1.06, 95% CI: 0.86-1.32, p = .57). Landmark analyses suggested a time-varying risk with TAVI after 10 and 13 months in both largest and risk-adjusted populations (HR: 2.13, 95% CI: 1.45-3.12, p < .001; HR: 1.7, 95% CI: 1.11-2.61, p = .015, respectively). CONCLUSION: Considering the immediate outcomes and comparable overall survival observed in risk-adjusted populations, TAVI can be used safely in selected BAV patients. However, a time-varying risk is present (favoring SAVR over TAVI at a later timepoint). This finding was likely driven by higher rates of PPI with TAVI.