Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic: a perspective from industry.

The global COVID-19 pandemic has led to unprecedented change throughout society.1 As the articles in this supplement outline, all segments of the broader cardiovascular community have been forced to adapt, to change models of care delivery, and to evolve and innovate in order to deliver optimal management for cardiovascular patients. The medtech/device industry has not been exempt from such change and has been forced to navigate direct and indirect COVID-associated disruption, with effects felt from supply chain logistics to the entire product lifecycle, from the running of clinical trials to new device approvals and managing training, proctoring and congresses in an increasingly-online world. This sea-change in circumstances itself has enforced the industry, in effect, to disrupt its own processes, models and activities. Whilst some of these changes may be temporary, many will endure for some time and some will doubtless become permanent; one thing is for sure: the healthcare ecosystem, including the medical device industry, will never look quite the same again. Although the pandemic has brought a short- to medium-term medical crisis to many countries, its role as a powerful disruptor cannot be underestimated, and may indeed prove to be a force for long-term good, given the accelerated innovation and rapid adaptation that it has cultivated.

Standardized Definition of Structural Valve Degeneration for Surgical and Transcatheter Bioprosthetic Aortic Valves.

Bioprostheses are prone to structural valve degeneration, resulting in limited long-term durability. A significant challenge when comparing the durability of different types of bioprostheses is the lack of a standardized terminology for the definition of a degenerated valve. This issue becomes especially important when we try to compare the degeneration rate of surgically inserted and transcatheter bioprosthetic valves. This document, by the VIVID (Valve-in-Valve International Data), proposes practical and standardized definitions of valve degeneration and provides recommendations for the timing of clinical and imaging follow-up assessments accordingly. Its goal is to improve the quality of research and clinical care for patients with deteriorated bioprostheses by providing objective and strict criteria that can be utilized in future clinical trials. We hope that the adoption of these criteria by both the cardiological and surgical communities will lead to improved comparability and interpretation of durability analyses.

Inadequacy of existing clinical prediction models for predicting mortality after transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

BACKGROUND: The performance of emerging transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) clinical prediction models (CPMs) in national TAVI cohorts distinct from those where they have been derived is unknown. This study aimed to investigate the performance of the German Aortic Valve, FRANCE-2, OBSERVANT and American College of Cardiology (ACC) TAVI CPMs compared with the performance of historic cardiac CPMs such as the EuroSCORE and STS-PROM, in a large national TAVI registry. METHODS: The calibration and discrimination of each CPM were analyzed in 6676 patients from the UK TAVI registry, as a whole cohort and across several subgroups. Strata included gender, diabetes status, access route, and valve type. Furthermore, the amount of agreement in risk classification between each of the considered CPMs was analyzed at an individual patient level. RESULTS: The observed 30-day mortality rate was 5.4%. In the whole cohort, the majority of CPMs over-estimated the risk of 30-day mortality, although the mean ACC score (5.2%) approximately matched the observed mortality rate. The areas under ROC curve were between 0.57 for OBSERVANT and 0.64 for ACC. Risk classification agreement was low across all models, with Fleiss's kappa values between 0.17 and 0.50. CONCLUSIONS: Although the FRANCE-2 and ACC models outperformed all other CPMs, the performance of current TAVI-CPMs was low when applied to an independent cohort of TAVI patients. Hence, TAVI specific CPMs need to be derived outside populations previously used for model derivation, either by adapting existing CPMs or developing new risk scores in large national registries.

Do outcomes from transcatheter aortic valve implantation vary according to access route and valve type? The UK TAVI Registry.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether outcomes from transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) vary according to access route and valve type in a real-world population. BACKGROUND: Registry and uncontrolled trial data have found that patients undergoing nonfemoral TAVI have higher early and late mortality. It is not clear whether worse outcomes relate directly to access route. There have been no direct comparisons of outcomes according to valve type. METHODS: Data were collected prospectively on 1,620 patients undergoing TAVI in the UK and compared in 4 groups: SAPIEN transfemoral (TF); SAPIEN transapical (TA); CoreValve TF, CoreValve subclavian. Univariable and multivariable regression analysis was performed to identify independent predictors of mortality. RESULTS: Mortality in patients undergoing SAPIEN TAVI via a TA approach was higher than with TF at 30 days (11.2% vs. 4.4%, P < 0.01), 1 year (28.7% vs. 18.1%, P = 0.01), and 2 years (56.0% vs. 43.5%, P = 0.01). Logistic EuroSCORE was higher in TA patients (22.5 ± 12.9% vs. 17.7 ± 11.1%, P < 0.0001). After multivariable analysis TA access was associated with increased mortality at 30 days (OR 2.56, 95% CI 1.46-4.48, P < 0.01) and 2 years (OR 1.75, 1.08-2.74, P = 0.02). There was no significant difference in mortality at any time-point between patients treated with SAPIEN (n = 812) and CoreValve (n = 808) prostheses. CoreValve-treated patients had a higher rate of permanent pacemaker implantation (23.1% vs. 7.2%, P < 0.0001), and grade ≥2 aortic regurgitation on postprocedure echocardiography (13.0% vs. 7.3%, P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing TA TAVI experienced increased early and late mortality compared to a TF approach. Survival was not influenced by valve type.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation in failed bioprosthetic surgical valves.

IMPORTANCE: Owing to a considerable shift toward bioprosthesis implantation rather than mechanical valves, it is expected that patients will increasingly present with degenerated bioprostheses in the next few years. Transcatheter aortic valve-in-valve implantation is a less invasive approach for patients with structural valve deterioration; however, a comprehensive evaluation of survival after the procedure has not yet been performed. OBJECTIVE: To determine the survival of patients after transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation inside failed surgical bioprosthetic valves. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Correlates for survival were evaluated using a multinational valve-in-valve registry that included 459 patients with degenerated bioprosthetic valves undergoing valve-in-valve implantation between 2007 and May 2013 in 55 centers (mean age, 77.6 [SD, 9.8] years; 56% men; median Society of Thoracic Surgeons mortality prediction score, 9.8% [interquartile range, 7.7%-16%]). Surgical valves were classified as small (≤21 mm; 29.7%), intermediate (>21 and <25 mm; 39.3%), and large (≥25 mm; 31%). Implanted devices included both balloon- and self-expandable valves. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Survival, stroke, and New York Heart Association functional class. RESULTS: Modes of bioprosthesis failure were stenosis (n = 181 [39.4%]), regurgitation (n = 139 [30.3%]), and combined (n = 139 [30.3%]). The stenosis group had a higher percentage of small valves (37% vs 20.9% and 26.6% in the regurgitation and combined groups, respectively; P = .005). Within 1 month following valve-in-valve implantation, 35 (7.6%) patients died, 8 (1.7%) had major stroke, and 313 (92.6%) of surviving patients had good functional status (New York Heart Association class I/II). The overall 1-year Kaplan-Meier survival rate was 83.2% (95% CI, 80.8%-84.7%; 62 death events; 228 survivors). Patients in the stenosis group had worse 1-year survival (76.6%; 95% CI, 68.9%-83.1%; 34 deaths; 86 survivors) in comparison with the regurgitation group (91.2%; 95% CI, 85.7%-96.7%; 10 deaths; 76 survivors) and the combined group (83.9%; 95% CI, 76.8%-91%; 18 deaths; 66 survivors) (P = .01). Similarly, patients with small valves had worse 1-year survival (74.8% [95% CI, 66.2%-83.4%]; 27 deaths; 57 survivors) vs with intermediate-sized valves (81.8%; 95% CI, 75.3%-88.3%; 26 deaths; 92 survivors) and with large valves (93.3%; 95% CI, 85.7%-96.7%; 7 deaths; 73 survivors) (P = .001). Factors associated with mortality within 1 year included having small surgical bioprosthesis (≤21 mm; hazard ratio, 2.04; 95% CI, 1.14-3.67; P = .02) and baseline stenosis (vs regurgitation; hazard ratio, 3.07; 95% CI, 1.33-7.08; P = .008). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this registry of patients who underwent transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation for degenerated bioprosthetic aortic valves, overall 1-year survival was 83.2%. Survival was lower among patients with small bioprostheses and those with predominant surgical valve stenosis.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement for degenerative bioprosthetic surgical valves: results from the global valve-in-valve registry.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve-in-valve implantation is an emerging therapeutic alternative for patients with a failed surgical bioprosthesis and may obviate the need for reoperation. We evaluated the clinical results of this technique using a large, worldwide registry. METHODS AND RESULTS: The Global Valve-in-Valve Registry included 202 patients with degenerated bioprosthetic valves (aged 77.7±10.4 years; 52.5% men) from 38 cardiac centers. Bioprosthesis mode of failure was stenosis (n=85; 42%), regurgitation (n=68; 34%), or combined stenosis and regurgitation (n=49; 24%). Implanted devices included CoreValve (n=124) and Edwards SAPIEN (n=78). Procedural success was achieved in 93.1% of cases. Adverse procedural outcomes included initial device malposition in 15.3% of cases and ostial coronary obstruction in 3.5%. After the procedure, valve maximum/mean gradients were 28.4±14.1/15.9±8.6 mm Hg, and 95% of patients had ≤+1 degree of aortic regurgitation. At 30-day follow-up, all-cause mortality was 8.4%, and 84.1% of patients were at New York Heart Association functional class I/II. One-year follow-up was obtained in 87 patients, with 85.8% survival of treated patients. CONCLUSIONS: The valve-in-valve procedure is clinically effective in the vast majority of patients with degenerated bioprosthetic valves. Safety and efficacy concerns include device malposition, ostial coronary obstruction, and high gradients after the procedure.

Vascular reactivity and flow characteristics of radial artery and long saphenous vein coronary bypass grafts: a 5-year follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Radial artery (RA) aortocoronary bypass grafts anastomosed to a branch of the circumflex coronary artery have significantly better patency rates than saphenous vein (SV) grafts at 5 years, but the physiological characteristics and mechanisms involved are not clearly defined. We compared RA and SV graft vasomotor and flow responses to endothelium-dependent and -independent stimuli 5 years after surgery in a subgroup of patients enrolled in the Radial artery versus Saphenous Vein Patency (RSVP) trial. METHODS AND RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients were included in the study (RA, n=15; SV, n=12). Graft blood flow was calculated from flow velocity, measured by intracoronary Doppler, and luminal diameter, measured by quantitative coronary angiography, before and after intragraft infusions of adenosine, acetylcholine, and isosorbide dinitrate. At rest, RA luminal diameters were significantly smaller than SV luminal diameters (P=0.029), blood flow velocity was greater in RA than SV (P=0.008), and volume blood flows were similar. RA but not SV dilated in response to adenosine and isosorbide dinitrate (all P<0.05, RA versus SV, percent change from baseline), and there were no significant differences in the diameter responses to acetylcholine. Volume blood flow responses to adenosine, acetylcholine, and isosorbide dinitrate were comparable. CONCLUSIONS: Five years after surgery, RA coronary bypass conduits grafted to a single coronary territory demonstrated preserved flow-mediated vasodilatation, whereas SV grafts did not. Our results may provide insight into the more favorable patency of RA grafts over SV grafts. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00139399.

Radial artery versus saphenous vein patency randomized trial: five-year angiographic follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Graft patency is a fundamental predictor of long-term survival after coronary artery bypass surgery. Left and right internal thoracic artery (arterial) graft patency has been shown to be superior to that of saphenous vein grafts. More recently, the radial artery has been used as an aortocoronary graft, but little is known about the midterm and long-term patency of this conduit. We performed a single-center prospective randomized trial comparing the angiographic patency of radial artery and saphenous vein aortocoronary bypass grafts at 5 years after surgery. METHODS AND RESULTS: We enrolled 142 patients randomized at a single center to have either the radial artery or saphenous vein grafted to a stenosed branch of the native left circumflex coronary artery. The primary end point was angiographic graft patency 5 years postoperatively. At 5 years, 134 patients were alive and eligible for reangiography (5-year survival, 94.4%). Angiography was performed in 103 patients (77%); 98.3% of radial artery grafts and 86.4% of saphenous vein grafts were patent (P=0.04). Graft narrowing occurred in 10% of patent radial artery grafts and 23% of patent saphenous vein grafts (P=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Radial artery aortocoronary bypass grafts to a stenosed branch of the circumflex coronary artery have an excellent patency rate at 5 years. This was significantly better than the patency rate for saphenous vein grafts and comparable to reported patency rates for internal thoracic artery grafts.

Novel United Kingdom prognostic model for 30-day mortality following transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

OBJECTIVE: Existing clinical prediction models (CPM) for short-term mortality after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) have limited applicability in the UK due to moderate predictive performance and inconsistent recording practices across registries. The aim of this study was to derive a UK-TAVI CPM to predict 30-day mortality risk for benchmarking purposes. METHODS: A two-step modelling strategy was undertaken: first, data from the UK-TAVI Registry between 2009 and 2014 were used to develop a multivariable logistic regression CPM using backwards stepwise regression. Second, model-updating techniques were applied using the 2013-2014 data, thereby leveraging new approaches to include frailty and to ensure the model was reflective of contemporary practice. Internal validation was performed by bootstrapping to estimate in-sample optimism-corrected performance. RESULTS: Between 2009 and 2014, up to 6339 patients were included across 34 centres in the UK-TAVI Registry (mean age, 81.3; 2927 female (46.2%)). The observed 30-day mortality rate was 5.14%. The final UK-TAVI CPM included 15 risk factors, which included two variables associated with frailty. After correction for in-sample optimism, the model was well calibrated, with a calibration intercept of 0.02 (95% CI -0.17 to 0.20) and calibration slope of 0.79 (95% CI 0.55 to 1.03). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, after adjustment for in-sample optimism, was 0.66. CONCLUSION: The UK-TAVI CPM demonstrated strong calibration and moderate discrimination in UK-TAVI patients. This model shows potential for benchmarking, but even the inclusion of frailty did not overcome the need for more wide-ranging data and other outcomes might usefully be explored.

Tricuspid annuloplasty versus a conservative approach in patients with functional tricuspid regurgitation undergoing left-sided heart valve surgery: A study-level meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Tricuspid valve (TV) repair at the time of left-sided valve surgery is indicated in patients with either severe functional tricuspid regurgitation (TR) or mild-to-moderate TR with coexistent tricuspid annular dilation or right heart failure. We assessed the benefits of a concomitant TV repair strategy during left-sided surgical valve interventions, focusing on mortality and echocardiographic TR-related outcomes. METHODS: A meta-analysis was performed of studies reporting outcomes of patients who underwent left-sided (mitral and/or aortic) valve surgery with or without concomitant TV repair. Primary endpoints were all-cause and cardiac-related mortality; secondary endpoints were the presence of more-than-moderate TR, TR progression, and TR severity grade. All endpoints were evaluated at the longest available follow-up. RESULTS: Fifteen studies were included for a total of 2840 patients. TV repair at the time of left-sided valve surgery was associated with a significantly lower risk of cardiac-related mortality (odds ratio [OR] 0.38; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.25-0.58; p<0.001), with a trend towards a lower risk of all-cause mortality (OR 0.57; 95% CI: 0.32-1.05; p=0.07) at a mean weighted follow-up of 6years. The presence of more-than-moderate TR (OR 0.19; 95% CI: 0.12-0.30; p<0.001), TR progression (OR 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01-0.05; p<0.001), and TR grade (standardized mean difference -1.11; 95% CI: -1.57 to -0.65; p<0.001) were significantly lower in the TV repair group at a mean weighted follow-up of 4.7years. CONCLUSIONS: A concomitant TV repair strategy during left-sided valve surgery is associated with a reduction in cardiac-related mortality and improved echocardiographic TR outcomes at follow-up.

Relative Survival After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: How Do Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Fare Relative to the General Population?

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is indicated for patients with aortic stenosis who are intermediate-high surgical risk. Although all-cause mortality rates after TAVI are established, survival attributable to the procedure is unclear because of competing causes of mortality. The aim was to report relative survival (RS) after TAVI, which accounts for background mortality risks in a matched general population. METHODS AND RESULTS: National cohort data (n=6420) from the 2007 to 2014 UK TAVI registry were matched by age, sex, and year to mortality rates for England and Wales (population, 57.9 million). The Ederer II method related observed patient survival to that expected from the matched general population. We modelled RS using a flexible parametric approach that modelled the log cumulative hazard using restricted cubic splines. RS of the TAVI cohort was 95.4%, 90.2%, and 83.8% at 30 days, 1 year, and 3 years, respectively. By 1-year follow-up, mortality hazards in the >85 years age group were not significantly different from those of the matched general population; by 3 years, survival rates were comparable. The flexible parametric RS model indicated that increasing age was associated with significantly lower excess hazards after the procedure; for example, by 2 years, a 5-year increase in age was associated with 20% lower excess mortality over the general population. CONCLUSIONS: RS after TAVI was high, and survival rates in those aged >85 years approximated those of a matched general population within 3 years. High rates of RS indicate that patients selected for TAVI tolerate the risks of the procedure well.

Prevalence and Prognostic Significance of Right Ventricular Systolic Dysfunction in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation.

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) can provide important structural information in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Although CMR is considered the standard of reference for measuring ventricular volumes and mass, the relationship between CMR findings of right ventricular (RV) function and outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation has not previously been reported. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 190 patients underwent 1.5 Tesla CMR before transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Steady-state free precession sequences were used for aortic valve planimetry and to assess ventricular volumes and mass. Semiautomated image analysis was performed by 2 specialist reviewers blinded to patient treatment. Patient follow-up was obtained from the Office of National Statistics mortality database. The median age was 81.0 (interquartile range, 74.9-85.5) years; 50.0% were women. Impaired RV function (RV ejection fraction ≤50%) was present in 45 (23.7%) patients. Patients with RV dysfunction had poorer left ventricular ejection fractions (42% versus 69%), higher indexed left ventricular end-systolic volumes (96 versus 40 mL), and greater indexed left ventricular mass (101 versus 85 g/m(2); P<0.01 for all) than those with normal RV function. Median follow-up was 850 days; 21 of 45 (46.7%) patients with RV dysfunction died, compared with 43 of 145 (29.7%) patients with normal RV function (P=0.035). After adjustment for significant baseline variables, both RV ejection fraction ≤50% (hazard ratio, 2.12; P=0.017) and indexed aortic valve area (hazard ratio, 4.16; P=0.025) were independently associated with survival. CONCLUSIONS: RV function, measured on preprocedural CMR, is an independent predictor of mortality after transcatheter aortic valve implantation. CMR assessment of RV function may be important in the risk stratification of patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

Impact of left ventricular function and transaortic gradient on outcomes from transcatheter aortic valve implantation: data from the UK TAVI Registry.

AIMS: Aortic valve surgery in the presence of reduced ejection fraction (EF) or low transaortic gradient is associated with adverse outcome. Low gradient (LG) may be associated with reduced EF, known as low EF-low gradient (LEF-LG), or "paradoxically" low with normal EF (P-LG). Our aim was to investigate the impact of EF and transaortic gradient on outcome following transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). METHODS AND RESULTS: We retrospectively analysed the UK TAVI Registry from 2007 to 2011 (n=2,535 consecutive patients, mean age 81.3±7.5, logistic EuroSCORE 21.8±14). Thirty-day mortality was 7.8%, low EF (<50%) was present in 39%, low gradient (<64 mmHg) was present in 27%, LEF-LG in 15% and P-LG in 12% of patients, respectively. LEF-LG patients had the highest risk profile vs. the other groups (EuroSCORE 30±16 vs. 20±12, p<0.001). Neither EF nor gradient impacted on procedural outcome or 30-day mortality. Mortality at two years was significantly higher in LEF-LG patients (34.7%), whereas, in patients with low EF/high gradient (27.8%) or normal EF/low gradient (23%), mortality was not significantly different from that of normal EF/high gradient (23%) patients. LEF-LG independently predicted reduced survival, HR 1.7 (1.4-2.1). CONCLUSIONS: Neither low EF nor low gradient affected procedural success or 30-day mortality. Long-term survival was reduced in LEF-LG patients but not in those with low EF and high gradient or P-LG with normal EF.

Management of concomitant coronary artery disease in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation: the United Kingdom TAVI Registry.

BACKGROUND: The management and impact of concomitant coronary artery disease in patients referred for TAVI remains contentious. We describe the prevalence, clinical impact and management of coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients in the United Kingdom TAVI Registry. METHODS: All-inclusive study of patients undergoing TAVI in the United Kingdom (excluding Northern Ireland) from January 2007 to December 2011. Coronary artery disease at the time of TAVI was demonstrated on invasive angiography. RESULTS: 2588 consecutive patients were entered in the U.K. TAVI Registry. CAD was reported in 1171 pts with left main stem involvement in 12.4% of this cohort (n=145). Most patients were free of chest pain, but limited by dyspnoea (NYHA Class III & IV 81.9%). Angina was however more prevalent in those patients with CAD (p<0.0001). Hybrid PCI was uncommon, performed in only 14.7% of the CAD cohort (n=172). Survival at 30days, 1year, and 4years was 93.7%, 81.4% and 72.0% respectively. Adjusting for confounders in a multivariate model the presence and extent of CAD was not associated with early (30-days, p=0.36) or late (4years, p=0.10) survival. CONCLUSIONS: This contemporary study of coronary artery disease management in an "all-comers" patient population undergoing TAVI demonstrates that whilst often an indicator of significant underlying comorbidity coronary artery disease is not associated with decreased short or long-term survival. The majority of patients with aortic stenosis and concomitant CAD can be managed effectively by TAVI alone. However, the importance of the Heart Team in making decisions on individual patients must not be underestimated.

Clinical and economic consequences of non-cardiac incidental findings detected on cardiovascular computed tomography performed prior to transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI).

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is an effective treatment option for patients with severe degenerative aortic valve stenosis who are high risk for conventional surgery. Computed tomography (CT) performed prior to TAVI can detect pathologies that could influence outcomes following the procedure, however the incidence, cost, and clinical impact of incidental findings has not previously been investigated. 279 patients underwent CT; 188 subsequently had TAVI and 91 were declined. Incidental findings were classified as clinically significant (requiring treatment), indeterminate (requiring further assessment), or clinically insignificant. The primary outcome measure was all-cause mortality up to 3 years. Costs incurred by additional investigations resultant to incidental findings were estimated using the UK Department of Health Payment Tariff. Incidental findings were common in both the TAVI and medical therapy cohorts (54.8 vs. 70.3%; P = 0.014). Subsequently, 45 extra investigations were recommended for the TAVI cohort, at an overall average cost of £32.69 per TAVI patient. In a univariate model, survival was significantly associated with the presence of a clinically significant or indeterminate finding (HR 1.61; P = 0.021). However, on multivariate analysis outcomes after TAVI were not influenced by any category of incidental finding. Incidental findings are common on CT scans performed prior to TAVI. However, the total cost involved in investigating these findings is low, and incidental findings do not independently identify patients with poorer outcomes after TAVI. The discovery of an incidental finding on CT should not necessarily influence or delay the decision to perform TAVI.

Comparative survival after transapical, direct aortic, and subclavian transcatheter aortic valve implantation (data from the UK TAVI registry).

Many patients have iliofemoral vessel anatomy unsuitable for conventional transfemoral (TF) transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Safe and practical alternatives to the TF approach are, therefore, needed. This study compared outcomes of alternative nonfemoral routes, transapical (TA), direct aortic (DA), and subclavian (SC), with standard femoral access. In this retrospective study, data from 3,962 patients in the UK TAVI registry were analyzed. All patients who received TAVI through a femoral, subclavian, TA, or DA approach were eligible for inclusion. The primary outcome measure was survival up to 2 years. Median Logistic EuroSCORE was similar for SC, DA, and TA but significantly lower in the TF cohort (22.1% vs 20.3% vs 21.2% vs 17.0%, respectively, p <0.0001). Estimated 1-year survival rate was similar for TF (84.6 ± 0.7%) and SC (80.5 ± 3%, p = 0.27) but significantly worse for TA (74.7 ± 1.6%, p <0.001) and DA (75.2 ± 3.3%, p <0.001). A Cox proportional hazard model was used to analyze survival up to 2 years. Survival in the SC group was not significantly different from the TF group (hazard ratio [HR] 1.22, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.88 to 1.70, p = 0.24). In contrast, survival in the TA (HR 1.74, 95% CI 1.43 to 2.11; p <0.001) and DA (HR 1.55, 95% CI 1.13 to 2.14; p <0.01) cohorts was significantly reduced compared with TF. In conclusion, TA and DA TAVI were associated with similar survival, both significantly worse than with the TF route. In contrast, subclavian access was not significantly different from TF and may represent the safest nonfemoral access route for TAVI.

Effect of advanced chronic kidney disease in clinical and echocardiographic outcomes of patients treated with MitraClip system.

BACKGROUND: Data regarding the influence of different levels of renal dysfunction on clinical and echocardiographic results of MitraClip therapy are scarce. We aimed to evaluate the impact of baseline advance renal failure in the outcomes of a cohort of patients treated with MitraClip. METHODS AND RESULTS: We analyzed data from a multicenter registry of 173 patients treated with MitraClip between 2009 and 2012. Patients were classified as advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD, creatinine clearance [CrCl] <30 ml/min, group 1, n=20), moderate CKD (CrCl 30-60 ml/min, group 2, n=78) and normal renal function (CrCl >60 ml/min, group 3, n=75). Twenty patients (11.5%) presented advanced CKD. Procedural success was equal in the 3 groups (95.0% group 1, 100% in group 2 and 96.0% in group 3, p=0.180). Post-procedural MR and NYHA class at 1 month (MR ≥ 3+5.0% vs. 0% vs. 4.0% p=0.190 and NYHA>II 40.0% vs. 21.0% vs. 18.3%, p=0.101) and 6 months (MR ≥ 3+0% vs. 13.0% vs. 2.7%, p=0.330; and NYHA class>II 54.5% vs. 26.9% vs. 25.6%, p=0.298) did not differ between groups. However, patients in group 1 experienced higher frequency of the composite end-point of mortality or readmission at 16.2 ± 11.1 months of follow-up (HR 4.8, CI 95% 1.1-21.3). CONCLUSION: Advanced CKD is linked to an excess of cardiac adverse events. This should be judiciously taken into account when selecting patients for MitraClip.

Effect of gender on results of percutaneous edge-to-edge mitral valve repair with MitraClip system.

Knowledge regarding gender-specific results of percutaneous edge-to-edge mitral valve repair is scarce. The aim of this study was to investigate gender differences in outcomes in a cohort of patients treated with MitraClip implantation. A multicenter registry of 173 patients treated with MitraClip prostheses from 2009 to 2012 at 3 experienced centers was performed. One hundred nine patients (63%) were men. Men were younger (mean age 73 ± 10 vs 79 ± 9 years, p = 0.001) and had a higher prevalence of previous coronary bypass graft surgery (34% vs 13%, p = 0.002), previous myocardial infarction (46% vs 20%, p = 0.001), and diabetes mellitus (26% vs 11%, p = 0.020). There were no differences regarding New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class before the intervention (NYHA class III or IV in 95% of men vs 97% of women, p = 0.472) or the cause of mitral regurgitation (MR) (functional in 58% of men vs 48% of women, p = 0.233). Men exhibited significantly larger ventricles (mean indexed left ventricular end-systolic diameter 2.4 ± 0.8 vs 2.0 ± 1.6 cm/m(2), p = 0.002, and mean indexed left ventricular end-diastolic volume 92.7 ± 46.1 vs 59.9 ± 24.6 ml/m(2), p <0.001). At 1 month, there were no differences between groups in the reduction of MR or NYHA functional class (MR grade ≤2+ in 98.2% of men vs 96.8% of women, p = 0.586, and NYHA class ≤II in 78.3% of men vs 77% of women, p = 0.851). At 6 months, results were maintained (MR grade ≤2+ in 89.5% of men vs 96.8% of women, p = 0.414, and NYHA class ≤II in 73.1% of men vs 74.2% of women, p = 0.912). After a mean follow-up period of 16.1 ± 11.1 months, no difference was found between groups in the incidence of death or admission for heart failure (log-rank p = 0.798). In conclusion, MitraClip implantation seems to be an equally safe and effective treatment of MR in men and women.

Effects of radial artery harvesting on forearm function and blood flow.

BACKGROUND: There is little information on the effects of radial artery harvesting on postoperative forearm function and blood flow. We evaluated the early changes in forearm neural sensation, circumference, grip power, cyclical exercise fatigue, and blood flow after radial artery harvesting for coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery. METHODS: Twenty-three patients with negative Allen's test of the nondominant forearm were recruited preoperatively and underwent assessment of bilateral forearm function (soft touch and pin-prick neural sensation, circumference, handgrip power, cyclical exercise fatigue) and blood flow measurements (forearm plethysmography). All vasoactive drugs were stopped 24 hours before assessments. Identical follow-up assessments were conducted (mean +/- SEM) 3.4 +/- 0.4 months postoperatively. RESULTS: At the time of postoperative assessment all harvested forearm wounds were healed. There was no reduction of postoperative soft touch sensation but in 3 patients objective pinprick sensation was reduced in the distribution of the lateral antebrachial cutaneous nerve of the harvested forearms. Postoperative forearm circumference (p < 0.05) and grip power (p < 0.05) were significantly reduced in both forearms, however cyclical exercise fatigue was improved in both forearms. Preoperative and postoperative forearm blood flow at rest and in exercise-induced ischemic reperfusion were not significantly different in both forearms. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with a negative Allen's test, harvesting of the radial artery does not adversely affect subsequent forearm function or blood flow to a clinically significant degree.