Bioprosthetic valve fracture for valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients with structural valve degeneration: Systematic review with meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the outcomes of bioprosthetic valve fracture (BVF) in valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation (ViV-TAVI) for patients with structural valve degeneration (SVD) of bioprosthetic surgical valves (BSV) implanted during surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). METHODS: A systematic review was conducted including studies published by May 2021. The primary endpoints of the study were 30-day mortality, annular rupture, stroke, paravalvular leak, pacemaker implantation, and coronary obstruction. The secondary endpoints were mean valve gradients (mmHg) and aortic valve area (AVA-cm2 ). A meta-analysis was conducted using the software R, version 3.6.3 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing). RESULTS: Four studies including 242 patients met our eligibility criteria. The overall proportions for 30-day mortality, annular rupture, stroke, paravalvular leak, pacemaker implantation and coronary obstruction were 2.1%, <1.0%, <1.5%, <1.0%, <1.0%, and <1.5%, respectively. After ViV-TAVI with BVF, the difference in means for mean valve gradients showed a significant reduction (random-effects model: -26.7; -28.8 to -24.7; p < .001), whereas the difference in means for AVA showed a significant increase (random-effects model: 0.55 cm2 ; 0.13-0.97; p = .029). Despite the improvement in AVA means, these remain too low after the procedure highly likely due to the small size of the bioprosthetic valves implanted during the index SAVR. CONCLUSION: ViV-TAVI with BVF has proven to be a promising option but data are still too scarce to enable us to draw definitive conclusions. Despite the decrease in gradients, postprocedural AVA remains worrisome. Studies with better designs and larger sample sizes are needed to advance this treatment option.

Total Arterial Coronary Bypass Graft Surgery is Associated with Better Long-Term Survival in Patients with Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease: a Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The benefit of total arterial revascularization (TAR) in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) remains a controversial issue. This study sought to evaluate whether there is any difference on the long-term results of TAR and non-TAR CABG patients. METHODS: The Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), Excerpta Medica dataBASE (EMBASE), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL/CCTR), Clinical Trials.gov, Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO), Literatura Latino-Americana e do Caribe em Ciências da Saúde (LILACS), and Google Scholar databases were searched for studies published by October 2020. Randomized clinical trials and observational studies with propensity score matching comparing TAR versus non-TAR CABG were included. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed. The current barriers to implementation of TAR in clinical practice and measures that can be used to optimize outcomes were reviewed. RESULTS: Fourteen publications (from 2012 to 2020) involving a total of 22,746 patients (TAR: 8,941 patients; non-TAR: 13,805 patients) were included. The pooled hazard ratio (HR) for long-term mortality (over 10 years) was lower in the TAR group than in the non-TAR group (random effect model: HR 0.676, 95% confidence interval 0.586-0.779, P<0.001). There was evidence of low heterogeneity of treatment effect among the studies for mortality, and none of the studies had a particular impact on the summary result. The result was not influenced by age, sex, or comorbidities. We identified low risk of publication bias related to this outcome. CONCLUSION: This review found that TAR presents the best long-term results in patients who undergo CABG. Given that many patients are likely to benefit from TAR, its use should be encouraged.

Total arterial coronary bypass graft surgery is associated with better long-term survival in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease: a systematic review with meta-analysis

Abstract Introduction: The benefit of total arterial revascularization (TAR) in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) remains a controversial issue. This study sought to evaluate whether there is any difference on the long-term results of TAR and non-TAR CABG patients. Methods: The Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), Excerpta Medica dataBASE (EMBASE), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL/CCTR), Clinical Trials.gov, Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO), Literatura Latino-Americana e do Caribe em Ciências da Saúde (LILACS), and Google Scholar databases were searched for studies published by October 2020. Randomized clinical trials and observational studies with propensity score matching comparing TAR versus non-TAR CABG were included. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed. The current barriers to implementation of TAR in clinical practice and measures that can be used to optimize outcomes were reviewed. Results: Fourteen publications (from 2012 to 2020) involving a total of 22,746 patients (TAR: 8,941 patients; non-TAR: 13,805 patients) were included. The pooled hazard ratio (HR) for long-term mortality (over 10 years) was lower in the TAR group than in the non-TAR group (random effect model: HR 0.676, 95% confidence interval 0.586-0.779, P<0.001). There was evidence of low heterogeneity of treatment effect among the studies for mortality, and none of the studies had a particular impact on the summary result. The result was not influenced by age, sex, or comorbidities. We identified low risk of publication bias related to this outcome. Conclusion: This review found that TAR presents the best long-term results in patients who undergo CABG. Given that many patients are likely to benefit from TAR, its use should be encouraged.

Impact of Aortic Annulus Enlargement on the Outcomes of Aortic Valve Replacement: A Meta-analysis.

We sought to evaluate the impact of surgical aortic annulus enlargement (ARE) on the perioperative outcomes of surgical aortic valve replacement. Databases were searched for articles published by October 2019 in order to carry out a systematic review followed by meta-analysis. Thirteen studies with 40,447 patients (aortic valve replacement [AVR] with aortic annulus enlargement [AAE]: 4686 patients; AVR without AAE: 35,761 patients) were included. The total rate of AAE was 11.6%, ranging from 4.1%-28.1%. The overall unadjusted odds ratio (OR) (95% confidence interval [CI]) for operative mortality showed a statistically significant difference between the groups, with higher risk in the "AVR with AAE" group (OR 1.388; 95% CI 1.049-1.836, P < 0.001), but not for isolated AVR+AAE (OR 1.341; 95% CI 0.920-1.956, P = 0.127) and also not in matched populations (OR 1.003; 95% CI 0.773-1.300, P = 0.984). The "AVR with AAE" group showed an overall lower risk of significant patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM) (OR 0.567; 95% CI 0.376-0.854, P = 0.007) and a higher overall difference in means of indexed effective orifice area (iEOA) (random effect model: 0.058 cm2/m2; 95% CI 0.024-0.092, P < 0.001). The overall ORs for myocardial infarction, stroke, complete heart block/permanent pacemaker implantation and reoperation for bleeding showed no statistically significant difference between the groups. AAE is a useful adjunct to AVR, but the benefit of reduced PPM must be balanced against a possibly higher risk of perioperative mortality.

German Aortic Valve Score in Risk Assessment for Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in a Brazilian Center.

OBJECTIVE: To test the German Aortic Valve (GAV) score at our university hospital in patients undergoing isolated aortic valve replacement (AVR). METHODS: A total of 224 patients who underwent isolated conventional AVR between January 2015 and December 2018 were included. Patients with concomitant procedures and transcatheter aortic valve implantation were excluded. Patients' data were collected and analyzed retrospectively. Patients' risk scores were calculated according to criteria described by GAV score. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy (area under the ROC curve [AUC]) were also calculated. The calibration of the model was tested by the Hosmer-Lemeshow method. RESULTS: The mortality rate was 8.04% (18 patients). The patients' mean age was 58.2±19.3 years and 25% of them were female (56 patients). Mean GAV score was 1.73±5.86 (min: 0.0; max: 3.53). The GAV score showed excellent discriminative capacity (AUC 0.925, 95% confidence interval 0.882-0.956; P<0.001). The cutoff "1.8" turned out to be the best discriminatory point with the best combination of sensitivity (88.9%) and specificity (75.7%) to predict operative death. Hosmer-Lemeshow method revealed a P-value of 0.687, confirming a good calibration of the model. CONCLUSION: The GAV score applies to our population with high predictive accuracy.

German aortic valve score in risk assessment for surgical aortic valve replacement in a brazilian center

Abstract Objective: To test the German Aortic Valve (GAV) score at our university hospital in patients undergoing isolated aortic valve replacement (AVR). Methods: A total of 224 patients who underwent isolated conventional AVR between January 2015 and December 2018 were included. Patients with concomitant procedures and transcatheter aortic valve implantation were excluded. Patients' data were collected and analyzed retrospectively. Patients' risk scores were calculated according to criteria described by GAV score. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy (area under the ROC curve [AUC]) were also calculated. The calibration of the model was tested by the Hosmer-Lemeshow method. Results: The mortality rate was 8.04% (18 patients). The patients' mean age was 58.2±19.3 years and 25% of them were female (56 patients). Mean GAV score was 1.73±5.86 (min: 0.0; max: 3.53). The GAV score showed excellent discriminative capacity (AUC 0.925, 95% confidence interval 0.882-0.956; P<0.001). The cutoff "1.8" turned out to be the best discriminatory point with the best combination of sensitivity (88.9%) and specificity (75.7%) to predict operative death. Hosmer-Lemeshow method revealed a P-value of 0.687, confirming a good calibration of the model. Conclusion: The GAV score applies to our population with high predictive accuracy.

Anuloplastia concêntrica do anel mitral, isolada ou associada à ressecção quadrangular, em crianças e jovens / Mitral annuloplasty either in isolation or associated with posterior quadrantectomy in young patients

OBJETIVO: Descrever procedimento cirúrgico de anuloplastia concêntrica do anel mitral sem prótese, isolada ou associada à ressecção quadrangular com plicatura póstero-medial do anel mitral, e analisar os resultados imediatos e tardios obtidos. MÉTODO: Entre fevereiro de 1986 e fevereiro de 2001, realizamos 790 procedimentos abordando a valva mitral, 41 foram realizados em crianças e adolescentes menores de 20 anos (média de 9,7 anos). Vinte (48,7 por cento) pacientes eram do sexo feminino e 21 (51,3 por cento) do masculino. A doença reumática foi responsável pelas lesões em 92,6 por cento dos casos e a degeneração mixomatosa em apenas 7,4 por cento. No período pré-operatório, 22 (53,6 por cento) pacientes estavam em classe funcional III e 19 (46,4 por cento) em classe funcional IV, advindos de repetidos surtos de febre reumática, agravados pela desnutrição. A técnica cirúrgica utilizada foi a anuloplastia concêntrica, aplicada isoladamente ou em associação à ressecção quadrangular com plicatura póstero-medial. O curso do seguimento pós-operatório foi de 7 meses a 15 anos (3/2/1986 a 12/2/2001). RESULTADOS: A mortalidade hospitalar foi de 2,4 por cento. Os pacientes receberam alta sem sopro sistólico de regurgitação mitral. Dois pacientes apresentaram, ao longo dos anos (4 e 11 anos), estenose mitral e necessitaram reoperação, um deles operado com dois anos de idade. Dois doentes foram reoperados para corrigir disfunção aórtica previamente abordada por plastia (12 e 18 meses após a primeira operação), morrendo e contribuindo para mortalidade tardia de 5 por cento. CONCLUSAO: Consideramos a técnica empregada um procedimento alternativo, válido, de aplicação preferencial em crianças e adolescentes, de fácil reprodução e de baixíssimo custo.