Outcomes of Isolated Tricuspid Valve Surgery: A Society of Thoracic Surgeons Analysis and Risk Model.

BACKGROUND: To provide patients and surgeons with clinically relevant information, The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) Adult Cardiac Surgery Database was queried to develop a risk model for isolated tricuspid valve (TV) operations. METHODS: All patients in the STS Adult Cardiac Surgery Database who had undergone isolated TV repair or replacement (N = 13,587; age 48.3 ± 18.4 years) were identified (July 2017 to June 2023). Multivariable logistic regression accounting for TV replacement vs repair was used to model 8 operative outcomes: mortality, morbidity or mortality or both, stroke, renal failure, reoperation, prolonged ventilation, short hospital stay, and prolonged hospital stay. Model discrimination (C-statistic) and calibration were assessed using 9-fold cross-validation. RESULTS: The isolated TV study population included 41.1% repairs (N = 5,583; age 52.6 ± 18.1 years) and 58.9% replacements (N = 8,004; age 45.3 ± 18.0 years). The overall predicted risk of operative mortality was 5.6%, and it was similar in TV repairs and replacements (5.5% and 5.7%, respectively), as was the predicted risk of composite morbidity and mortality (28.2% and 26.8%). TV replacements were generally performed in younger patients with a higher endocarditis prevalence than TV repairs (45.7% vs 21.1%). The model yielded a C-statistic of 0.81 for mortality and 0.76 for the composite of morbidity and mortality, with excellent observed-to-expected calibration that was comparable in all subcohorts and predicted risk decile groups. CONCLUSIONS: An STS risk model has been developed for isolated TV surgery. The current mortality of isolated TV operations is lower than previously observed. This risk prediction model and these contemporary outcomes provide a new benchmark for current and future isolated TV interventions.

A fully automated artificial intelligence-driven software for planning of transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is increasingly performed for the treatment of aortic stenosis. Computed tomography (CT) analysis is essential for pre-procedural planning. Currently available software packages for TAVR planning require substantial human interaction. We describe development and validation of an artificial intelligence (AI) powered software to automatically rend anatomical measurements and other information required for TAVR planning and implantation. METHODS: Automated measurements from 100 CTs were compared to measurements from three expert clinicians and TAVR operators using commercially available software packages. Correlation coefficients and mean differences were calculated to assess precision and accuracy. RESULTS: AI-generated annular measurements had excellent agreements with manual measurements by expert operators yielding correlation coefficients of 0.97 for both perimeter and area. There was no relevant bias with a mean difference of -0.07 mm and - 1.4 mm2 for perimeter and area, respectively. For the ascending aorta measured 5 cm above the annular plane, correlation coefficient was 0.95 and mean difference was 1.4 mm. Instruction for use-based sizing yielded agreement with the effective implant size in 87-88 % of patients for self-expanding valves (perimeter-based sizing) and in 88 % for balloon-expandable valves (area-based sizing). CONCLUSIONS: A fully automated software enables accurate and precise anatomical segmentation and measurements required for TAVR planning without human interaction and with high reliability.

The Society of Thoracic Surgeons 2023 Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Surgical Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation.

The Society of Thoracic Surgeons 2023 Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Surgical Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation incorporate the most recent evidence for surgical ablation and left atrial appendage occlusion in different clinical scenarios. Substantial new evidence regarding the risks and benefits of surgical left atrial appendage occlusion and the long-term benefits of surgical ablation has been produced in the last 5 years. Compared with the 2017 clinical practice guideline, the current update has an emphasis on surgical ablation in first-time, nonemergent cardiac surgery and its long-term benefits, an extension of the recommendation to perform surgical ablation in all patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing first-time, nonemergent cardiac surgery, and a new class I recommendation for left atrial appendage occlusion in all patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing first-time, nonemergent cardiac surgery. Further guidance is provided for patients with structural heart disease and atrial fibrillation being considered for transcatheter valve repair or replacement, as well as patients in need of isolated left atrial appendage management who are not candidates for surgical ablation. The importance of a multidisciplinary team assessment, treatment planning, and long-term follow-up are reiterated in this clinical practice guideline with a class I recommendation, along with the other recommendations from the 2017 guidelines that remained unchanged in their class of recommendation and level of evidence.

The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Surgery Database: 2023 Update on Procedure Data and Research.

The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) Adult Cardiac Surgery Database is one of the largest and most comprehensive contemporary clinical databases in use. It now contains >9 million procedures from 1010 participants and 3651 active surgeons. Using audited data collection, it has provided the foundation for multiple risk models, performance metrics, health policy decisions, and a trove of research studies to improve the care of patients in need of cardiac surgical procedures. This annual report provides an update on the current status of the database and summarizes the development of new risk models and the STS Online Risk Calculator. Further, it provides insights into current practice patterns, such as the change in the demographics among patients undergoing aortic valve replacement, the use of minimally invasive techniques for valve and bypass surgery, or the adoption of surgical ablation and left atrial appendage ligation among patients with atrial fibrillation. Lastly, an overview of the research conducted using the STS Adult Cardiac Surgery Database and future directions for the database are provided.

Expert systematic review on the choice of conduits for coronary artery bypass grafting: endorsed by the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS) and The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS).

PREAMBLE: The finalized document was endorsed by the EACTS Council and STS Executive Committee before being simultaneously published in the European Journal of Cardio-thoracic Surgery (EJCTS) and The Annals of Thoracic Surgery (The Annals) and the Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery (JTCVS).

Impact of Mitral Regurgitation Etiology on Mitral Surgery After Transcatheter Edge-to-Edge Repair: From the CUTTING-EDGE Registry.

BACKGROUND: Although >150,000 mitral TEER procedures have been performed worldwide, the impact of MR etiology on MV surgery after TEER remains unknown. OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to compare outcomes of mitral valve (MV) surgery after failed transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (TEER) stratified by mitral regurgitation (MR) etiology. METHODS: Data from the CUTTING-EDGE registry were retrospectively analyzed. Surgeries were stratified by MR etiology: primary (PMR) and secondary (SMR). MVARC (Mitral Valve Academic Research Consortium) outcomes at 30 days and 1 year were evaluated. Median follow-up was 9.1 months (IQR: 1.1-25.8 months) after surgery. RESULTS: From July 2009 to July 2020, 330 patients underwent MV surgery after TEER, of which 47% had PMR and 53.0% had SMR. Mean age was 73.8 ± 10.1 years, median STS risk at initial TEER was 4.0% (IQR: 2.2%-7.3%). Compared with PMR, SMR had a higher EuroSCORE, more comorbidities, lower LVEF pre-TEER and presurgery (all P < 0.05). SMR patients had more aborted TEER (25.7% vs 16.3%; P = 0.043), more surgery for mitral stenosis after TEER (19.4% vs 9.0%; P = 0.008), and fewer MV repairs (4.0% vs 11.0%; P = 0.019). Thirty-day mortality was numerically higher in SMR (20.4% vs 12.7%; P = 0.072), with an observed-to-expected ratio of 3.6 (95% CI: 1.9-5.3) overall, 2.6 (95% CI: 1.2-4.0) in PMR, and 4.6 (95% CI: 2.6-6.6) in SMR. SMR had significantly higher 1-year mortality (38.3% vs 23.2%; P = 0.019). On Kaplan-Meier analysis, the actuarial estimates of cumulative survival were significantly lower in SMR at 1 and 3 years. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of MV surgery after TEER is nontrivial, with higher mortality after surgery, especially in SMR patients. These findings provide valuable data for further research to improve these outcomes.

Explant vs Redo-TAVR After Transcatheter Valve Failure: Mid-Term Outcomes From the EXPLANTORREDO-TAVR International Registry.

BACKGROUND: Valve reintervention after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) failure has not been studied in detail. OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to determine outcomes of TAVR surgical explantation (TAVR-explant) vs redo-TAVR because they are largely unknown. METHODS: From May 2009 to February 2022, 396 patients in the international EXPLANTORREDO-TAVR registry underwent TAVR-explant (181, 46.4%) or redo-TAVR (215, 54.3%) for transcatheter heart valve (THV) failure during a separate admission from the initial TAVR. Outcomes were reported at 30 days and 1 year. RESULTS: The incidence of reintervention after THV failure was 0.59% with increasing volume during the study period. Median time from index-TAVR to reintervention was shorter in TAVR-explant vs redo-TAVR (17.6 months [IQR: 5.0-40.7 months] vs 45.7 months [IQR: 10.6-75.6 months]; P < 0.001], respectively. TAVR-explant had more prosthesis-patient mismatch (17.1% vs 0.5%; P < 0.001) as the indication for reintervention, whereas redo-TAVR had more structural valve degeneration (63.7% vs 51.9%; P = 0.023), with a similar incidence of ≥moderate paravalvular leak between groups (28.7% vs 32.8% in redo-TAVR; P = 0.44). There was a similar proportion of balloon-expandable THV failures (39.8% TAVR-explant vs 40.5% redo-TAVR; P = 0.92). Median follow-up was 11.3 (IQR: 1.6-27.1 months) after reintervention. Compared with redo-TAVR, TAVR-explant had higher mortality at 30 days (13.6% vs 3.4%; P < 0.001) and 1 year (32.4% vs 15.4%; P = 0.001), with similar stroke rates between groups. On landmark analysis, mortality was similar between groups after 30 days (P = 0.91). CONCLUSIONS: In this first report of the EXPLANTORREDO-TAVR global registry, TAVR-explant had a shorter median time to reintervention, with less structural valve degeneration, more prosthesis-patient mismatch, and similar paravalvular leak rates compared with redo-TAVR. TAVR-explant had higher mortality at 30 days and 1 year, but similar rates on landmark analysis after 30 days.

Transcatheter mitral valve replacement or repair for secondary mitral regurgitation: a propensity score-matched analysis.

AIMS: This study aimed to compare outcomes after transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR) and mitral valve transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (M-TEER) for the treatment of secondary mitral regurgitation (SMR). METHODS AND RESULTS: The CHOICE-MI registry included 262 patients with SMR treated with TMVR between 2014 and 2022. The EuroSMR registry included 1065 patients with SMR treated with M-TEER between 2014 and 2019. Propensity score (PS) matching was performed for 12 demographic, clinical and echocardiographic parameters. Echocardiographic, functional and clinical outcomes out to 1 year were compared in the matched cohorts. After PS matching, 235 TMVR patients (75.5 years [70.0, 80.0], 60.2% male, EuroSCORE II 6.3% [interquartile range 3.8, 12.4]) were compared to 411 M-TEER patients (76.7 years [70.1, 80.5], 59.0% male, EuroSCORE II 6.7% [3.9, 12.4]). All-cause mortality was 6.8% after TMVR and 3.8% after M-TEER at 30 days (p = 0.11), and 25.8% after TMVR and 18.9% after M-TEER at 1 year (p = 0.056). No differences in mortality after 1 year were found between both groups in a 30-day landmark analysis (TMVR: 20.4%, M-TEER: 15.8%, p = 0.21). Compared to M-TEER, TMVR resulted in more effective mitral regurgitation (MR) reduction (residual MR ≤1+ at discharge for TMVR vs. M-TEER: 95.8% vs. 68.8%, p < 0.001), and superior symptomatic improvement (New York Heart Association class ≤II at 1 year: 77.8% vs. 64.3%, p = 0.015). CONCLUSION: In this PS-matched comparison between TMVR and M-TEER in patients with severe SMR, TMVR was associated with superior reduction of MR and superior symptomatic improvement. While post-procedural mortality tended to be higher after TMVR, no significant differences in mortality were found beyond 30 days.

Risk of Surgical Mitral Valve Repair for Primary Mitral Regurgitation.

BACKGROUND: Risk estimation for surgical intervention is an essential component of heart team shared decision-making. However, current mitral valve (MV) surgery risk models used in practice lack etiologic or procedural specificity. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to establish a comprehensive method for assessment of operative risk of MV repair of primary mitral regurgitation (MR). METHODS: A novel etiology and procedure-specific algorithm identified 53,462 consecutive (July 2014 to June 2020) intention-to-treat MV repair patients with primary MR from The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Surgery Database. Risk models were fit for 30-day operative mortality, mortality and/or major morbidity, and conversion-to-replacement (CONV). As-treated mortality and morbidity models were derived separately. RESULTS: Event rates for mortality (n = 619; 1.16%), mortality plus morbidity (n = 4,746; 8.88%), and CONV (n = 3,399; 6.36%) were low. Mortality was higher in CONV patients vs repair (3.18% vs 1.02%). All event rates were lower with increasing program volumes. The mortality risk model had excellent discrimination (AUC: 0.807) and calibration and confirmed very low mortality risk for isolated MV repair for primary MR, with mean mortality risk of 1.16% and median of 0.55% (IQR: 0.30%-1.17%) with 90th and 95th percentiles 2.48% and 3.99%, respectively. The mortality risk was <0.5% in patients <65 years of age, with 97% of the total population across age groups having a risk of <3%. Only 1 in 4 patients age 75 or older had >3% estimated risk of mortality. CONCLUSIONS: This etiologic and procedure-specific risk model establishes that the contemporary mortality risk of MV repair for primary MR is <1% for the vast majority of patients.

Risk of Surgical Mitral Valve Repair for Primary Mitral Regurgitation.

BACKGROUND: Risk estimation for surgical intervention is an essential component of heart team shared decision-making. However, current mitral valve (MV) surgery risk models used in practice lack etiologic or procedural specificity. The purpose of this study was to establish a comprehensive method for assessment of operative risk of MV repair of primary mitral regurgitation (MR). METHODS: A novel etiology and procedure-specific algorithm identified 53,462 consecutive (July 2014 to June 2020) intention-to-treat MV repair patients with primary MR from The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Surgery Database. Risk models were fit for 30-day operative mortality, mortality and/or major morbidity, and conversion-to-replacement (CONV). As-treated mortality and morbidity models were derived separately. RESULTS: Event rates for mortality (n = 619; 1.16%), mortality plus morbidity (n = 4746; 8.88%), and CONV (n = 3399; 6.36%) were low. Mortality was higher in CONV patients vs repair (3.18% vs 1.02%). All event rates were lower with increasing program volumes. The mortality risk model had excellent discrimination (AUC: 0.807) and calibration and confirmed very low mortality risk for isolated MV repair for primary MR, with mean mortality risk of 1.16% and median of 0.55% (interquartile range: 0.30%-1.17%) with 90th and 95th percentiles 2.48% and 3.99%, respectively. The mortality risk was <0.5% in patients <65 years of age, with 97% of the total population across age groups having a risk of <3%. Only 1 in 4 patients age 75 or older had >3% estimated risk of mortality. CONCLUSIONS: This etiologic and procedure-specific risk model establishes that the contemporary mortality risk of MV repair for primary MR is <1% for the vast majority of patients.

Late Transcatheter Aortic Valve Thrombosis Leading to Cardiogenic Shock.

A 67-year-old woman with prior transcatheter aortic valve replacement presented with worsening dyspnea. Imaging revealed transcatheter aortic valve thrombosis and aortic stenosis. Despite oral anticoagulation, she progressively deteriorated and developed cardiogenic shock. We highlight the Heart Team's role in treating this unusual late thrombosis. (Level of Difficulty: Intermediate.).