Left Ventricular Pressure Ratio Predicts In-Hospital Outcomes in Hospitalized Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction.

BACKGROUND: Given the risk of hemodynamic compromise in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) patients undergoing left heart catheterization (LHC), there is a need for a simple parameter that can predict clinical outcomes. We hypothesize that left ventricular pressure ratio (LVPR), calculated as left ventricle systolic/left ventricle end-diastolic pressure, is a strong predictor of hemodynamic collapse in these patients. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of consecutive hospitalized HFrEF patients undergoing combined LHC and right heart catheterization (RHC) at a single institution from 2015-2017 was performed. LVPR was compared with standard RHC hemodynamic variables. The primary outcome was in-hospital escalation of therapy, defined as ≥40 mm Hg drop in systolic blood pressure (SBP), SBP ≤90 mm Hg for ≥15 minutes, start or escalation of vasoactive medications, cardiopulmonary resuscitation, or in-hospital death. Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) analysis and Kaplan-Meier survival analysis were performed for prediction of the primary outcome. RESULTS: A total of 176 patients were included in this study. ROC analysis determined an optimal cut-off value of ≤3.96, which correlated with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.65 (sensitivity, 45.9%; specificity, 83.2%; correctly classified, 64.9%). AUC was similar to other variables obtained using RHC. In-hospital survival free of escalation of therapy was lower in the low LVPR group vs the high LVPR group (0% vs 33%, respectively; P<.01). CONCLUSION: LVPR is an easily measured index obtained during LHC that can risk stratify hospitalized patients with HFrEF at the time of LHC.

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention following Placement of Sutureless Aortic Bioprostheses.

Coronary artery disease is often present with aortic stenosis. Although transcatheter aortic valve replacement and minimally invasive surgery provide alternative sternal-sparing options for isolated aortic valve replacement, non-sternotomy treatment of combined coronary artery disease and aortic stenosis has not been well-defined. We report 3 patients who presented with severe aortic stenosis and obstructive coronary artery disease in whom minimally invasive aortic valve replacement using sutureless valve was performed, followed by transradial percutaneous coronary intervention of obstructive coronary lesion. This case series demonstrates a hybrid technique for the treatment of combined severe aortic stenosis and coronary artery disease, which has potential for adequately treating both conditions with minimal risk.