Annular and supra-annular structure assessments for transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients with bicuspid aortic stenosis.

The clinical use indications for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) for the treatment of severe symptomatic aortic stenosis (AS) have expanded from patients at high surgical risk to those at low risk based on the results of multiple large-scale randomized trials. However, patients with bicuspid AS have traditionally been excluded from clinical trials due to their unfavorable morphological characteristics. Bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) is the most frequent congenital heart disease, occurring in 1% to 2% of the total population and affects more than 20% of octogenarians undergoing isolated aortic valve replacement for AS. In recent years, TAVR in patients with bicuspid AS has been the focus of research, especially with respect to the standard of prosthesis size selection. Annulus-based prosthesis size selection using computed tomography (CT) is the standard sizing strategy for tricuspid AS, but no standard sizing for bicuspid AS has been developed thus far. According to Western TAVR experiences, transcatheter heart valve (THV) size selection for BAV patients should be based on the annular structure assessment by CT measurement, whereas Chinese experiences favor adopting the supra-annulus structure assessment for THV size selection. This article will review annular and supra-annular sizing for prosthesis size selection in patients with bicuspid AS before TAVR and discuss which has more favorable clinical outcomes.

Efficacy and safety of bivalirudin vs heparin in patients with coronary heart disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: This meta-analysis is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of bivalirudin in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). METHODS: PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, CNKI, CBMdisc, and VIP database were searched. Randomized controlled trial (RCT) was selected and the meta-analysis was conducted by RevMan 5.1. The primary efficacy endpoint was the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and the primary safety endpoint was the incidence of major bleeding. Secondary efficacy endpoints were myocardial infarction (MI), target vessel revascularization (TVR), stent thrombosis (ST), stock, mortality, and thrombocytopenia. The pooled risk ratios (RRs) with the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used to assess the efficacy and safety of bivalirudin vs heparin. RESULTS: Seven RCTs met the inclusion criteria, and 16,640 patients were included. We found that bivalirudin associated with lower risk of mortality (RR = 1.05; 95% CI = 0.74-1.49; P = .03; I = 2%), major bleeding (RR = 0.64; 95% CI = 0.54-0.75; P < .00001; I = 70%) and thrombocytopenia (RR = 0.39; 95% CI = 0.25-0.61; P < .0001; I = 0) compared with heparin. However, the use of bivalirudin increase the risk of MI(RR = 1.37; 95% CI = 1.10-1.71; P = .004; I = 25%) and ST(RR = 1.61; 95% CI = 1.05-2.47; P = .03; I = 70%) and has similar risk of MACE (RR = 1.00; 95% CI = 0.90-1.11; P = .97; I = 16%), TVR (RR = 1.43; 95% CI = 0.92-2.22; P = .11; I = 46%) and stock (RR = 1.43; 95% CI = 0.92-2.22; P = .11; I = 46%) compared with heparin used in STEMI patients. CONCLUSION: Bivalirudin associated with lower risk of mortality, major bleeding and thrombocytopenia compared with heparin. However, the use of bivalirudin increase the risk of MI and ST and has similar risk of MACE, TVR and stock compared with heparin used in STEMI patients.