Unusual cause of myocardial infarction following transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

Key Clinical Message: Left coronary artery embolism from aortic valve leaflet tissue mass is a rare but potentially life-threatening complication following transcatheter aortic valve replacement. It is important for interventional cardiologists to be aware of this rare complication for rapid identification and prompt treatment which is the key to a successful outcome. Abstract: An 81-year-old female presented for elective transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) for severe low-flow low-gradient aortic stenosis. Immediately post-procedure, she developed unexplained, persistent hypotension. There was no bleeding. There was no aortic injury. Activated clotting time was in therapeutic range. Coronary angiography revealed hazy filling defects in left anterior descending and left circumflex. Intravascular ultrasound showed heterogeneous, hypoechoic mass with mild calcification consistent with embolized valve leaflet tissue. This was treated with emergent percutaneous coronary intervention with excellent results. Left coronary artery embolism from aortic valve leaflet tissue is a rare, but potentially life-threatening complication following TAVR. Prompt recognition is key to a successful outcome.

Robotic Resection of Left Atrial Myxoma With Cryoablation of Tumor Stalk.

The purpose of this report is to demonstrate robotic cryoablation of an atrial myxoma stalk as a method to prevent recurrence and preserve atrial tissue. A 38-year-old female patient was taken to the operating room, and an atrial myxoma abutting the left inferior pulmonary vein was resected robotically. This was followed by cryoablation of the tumor stalk instead of a full-thickness resection to prevent an extensive reconstruction. The operation resulted in the successful resection of an atrial myxoma with minimal length of stay. Follow-up at 3 months has shown no evidence of residual or recurrent tumor. Follow-up at 1 year is planned. Cryoablation of an atrial myxoma stalk, when resection would require complex reconstruction, is a useful tool in the armamentarium of a minimally invasive cardiac surgeon.

Optimal antiplatelet and antithrombotic regimen post-transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data regarding optimal antiplatelet/antithrombotic therapy following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). METHODS: In this single-centre retrospective study including TAVR patients from 2012 to 2020, ischemic and bleeding outcomes were compared between antiplatelet (dual antiplatelet [DAPT] vs. single antiplatelet [SAPT]) and oral anticoagulation (OAC) groups using incidence rate, Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards analysis. RESULTS: Total 492 patients (mean age 79.7 ± 7.7 years, 53.7% males, 83.5% Caucasian) were included. There was higher incidence of 1-year death or ischemia with DAPT vs. SAPT (23.6 vs. 14.8 per 100 patient-years [PY], incidence rate ratio [IRR] 1.60, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.97-2.68, p = .05), especially in those without coronary artery disease (23.9 vs. 10.7 per 100 PY, IRR 2.24, 95% CI 1.10-4.47, p = .017). There was significantly higher major bleeding in those on OAC vs. no OAC (15 vs. 8 per 100 PY, IRR 1.87, 95% CI 1.10-3.11, p = .016), especially late (>1-year) bleeding (10.2 vs. 3.6 per 100 PY, IRR 2.81, 95% CI 1.33-5.92, p = .004). In multivariate analysis, DAPT was an independent predictor of death or ischemia (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.41, 95% CI 1.01-1.96, p = .041). OAC was an independent predictor of major bleeding (aHR 2.32, 95% CI 1.31-4.13, p = .004). CONCLUSIONS: There is signal to harm with routine use of DAPT post-TAVR. There is higher incidence of late bleeding post-TAVR with OAC, suggesting potential role for alternate antithrombotic strategies.

Transxiphoid Revascularization of the Anterior Descending Coronary Artery with the Left Mammary Artery.

Revascularization of the coronary arteries, via open sternotomy and on cardiopulmonary bypass, remains the most common cardiac surgical procedure in the United States. Patients, and cardiologists, seek an alternative to dividing the sternum while reaping the advantages of left internal mammary artery (LIMA) revascularization of the diseased left anterior descending (LAD) coronary artery. We describe a strictly transxiphoid mammary artery liberation with anastomosis to the anterior descending (TRAX CABG) without sternal division. Of the 26 patients who underwent attempted TRAX CABG, 18 had nonsternotomy LIMA-to-LAD revascularization with completion angiogram to document bypass patency. TRAX CABG offers surgeons a minimally invasive alternative to trans-sternal LIMA-to-LAD in select patients. Conversion to traditional sternotomy has limited unanticipated morbidity and completion angiogram confirms procedural success.

Suprasternal Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Marginal Femoral Access.

OBJECTIVE: Recently, the PARTNER 2A trial reported results of transcatheter aortic valve replacement versus surgical aortic valve replacement in 2032 intermediate-risk patients at 2 years. Two hundred thirty-six patients (24%) required an access route other than transfemoral. Compared with transfemoral and surgical aortic valve replacement, nontransfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement was associated with a numerically higher rate of death and disabling stroke at 30 days. This underscores the need for a better alternative surgical approach for patients with marginal femoral access. We reviewed our multicenter experience with minimally invasive suprasternal transcatheter aortic valve replacement. METHODS: Consecutive patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis at high or intermediate risk for surgical aortic valve replacement underwent suprasternal transcatheter aortic valve replacement. A commercially available transcatheter heart valve was deployed under fluoroscopic guidance through the innominate artery or ascending aorta. Using a 3-cm skin incision just above the sternal notch, the Aegis Transit System (Aegis Surgical Ltd, Galway, Ireland) provided illuminated access to the mediastinum without bone disruption. Through a purse-string suture placed in the innominate artery or ascending aorta, transcatheter aortic valve replacement proceeded similarly to the direct aortic approach. RESULTS: Thirty patients at six medical centers successfully underwent suprasternal transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Implanted valves included 2 CoreValve and 12 Evolut-R (Medtronic, Inc, Minneapolis, MN USA), as well as 10 SAPIEN 3 and 6 SAPIEN XT (Edwards Lifesciences, Corp, Irvine, CA USA) with sizes ranging from 23 to 31 mm. Median procedure time was 90 minutes and median hospital stay was 4 days. Postoperatively, new permanent pacemaker (n = 3) was the most common Vascular Academic Research Consortium 2 complication. CONCLUSIONS: These data demonstrate the early clinical feasibility of suprasternal transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Key advantages of this approach include direct access to the innominate artery and ascending aorta, precise sheath control, and confident arterial closure. Additional experience is warranted to confirm these favorable results.

Factors Associated with Discharge to a Skilled Nursing Facility after Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Surgery.

An assumption regarding transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), a minimally invasive procedure for treating aortic stenosis, is that patients remain at, or near baseline and soon return to their presurgical home to resume activities of daily living. However, this does not consistently occur. The purpose of this study was to identify preoperative factors that optimally predict discharge to a skilled nursing facility (SNF) after TAVR. Delineation of these conditions is an important step in developing a risk stratification model to assist in making informed decisions. Data was extracted from the American College of Cardiology (ACC) transcatheter valve therapy (TVT) registry and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) database on 285 patients discharged from 2012⁻2017 at a tertiary referral heart institute located in the southeastern region of the United States. An analysis of assessment, clinical and demographic variables was used to estimate relative risk (RR) of discharge to a SNF. The majority of participants were female (55%) and white (84%), with a median age of 82 years (interquartile range = 9). Approximately 27% (n = 77) were discharged to a SNF. Age > 75 years (RR = 2.3, p = 0.0026), female (RR = 1.6, p = 0.019), 5-meter walk test (5MWT) >7 s (RR = 2.0, p = 0.0002) and not using home oxygen (RR = 2.9, p = 0.0084) were identified as independent predictive factors for discharge to a SNF. We report a parsimonious risk-stratification model that estimates the probability of being discharged to a SNF following TAVR. Our findings will facilitate making informed treatment decisions regarding this older patient population.

Robot-Assisted Partial Atrioventricular Canal Defect Repair and Cryo-Maze Procedure.

Atrial septal defect is one of the most common congenital heart anomalies in adults. Patients with partial atrioventricular canal defects, previously known as ostium primum atrial septal defect, usually present at an early age, and only a few reach adulthood without surgical correction. Herein, we describe a young woman who presented with an ostium primum defect and severe symptomatic mitral and tricuspid regurgitation with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. A complex repair was successfully done through a left atrial approach using robot-assistance.

Cross-sectional survey on minimally invasive mitral valve surgery.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (MIMVS) has become a standard technique to perform mitral valve surgery in many cardiac centers. However, there remains a question regarding when MIMVS should not be performed due to an increased surgical risk. Consequently, expert surgeons were surveyed regarding their opinions on patient factors, mitral valve pathology and surgical skills in MIMVS. METHODS: Surgeons experienced in MIMVS were identified through an electronic search of the literature. A link to an online survey platform was sent to all surgeons, as well as two follow-up reminders. Survey responses were then submitted to a central database and analyzed. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 20 surgeons. Overall results were not uniform with regard to contraindications to performing MIMVS. Some respondents do not consider left atrial enlargement (95% of surgeons), complexity of surgery (75%), age (70%), aortic calcification (70%), EuroSCORE (60%), left ventricular ejection fraction (55%), or obesity (50%) to be contraindication to surgery. Ninety percent of respondents believe more than 20 cases are required to gain familiarity with the procedure, while 85% believe at least one MIMVS case needs to be performed per week to maintain proficiency. Eighty percent recommend establishment of multi-institutional databases and standardized surgical mentoring courses, while 75% believe MIMVS should be incorporated into current training programs for trainees. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that MIMVS has been accepted as a treatment option for patients with mitral valve pathologies according the expert panel. Initial training and continuing practice is recommended to maintain proficiency, as well as further research and formalization of training programs.

Robotic mitral valve surgery-current status and future directions.

Robotic mitral valve surgery is the most common robotic cardiac procedure performed today. Benefits include smaller, less invasive incisions resulting in less pain, shorter length of hospital stay, improved cosmesis, quicker return to preoperative level of functional activity, and decreased blood transfusion requirements. The history and evolution of robotic mitral valve surgery is detailed in this article. Our institution has performed over 800 robotic mitral valve surgeries, and our technique and outcomes are described. Outcomes and operative times are similar to that for sternotomy and minimally invasive approaches to mitral valve surgery. The benefits and limitations of robotic mitral valve surgery are compared with conventional approaches, and future directions are also discussed.

Robotics in cardiac surgery: past, present, and future.

Robotic cardiac operations evolved from minimally invasive operations and offer similar theoretical benefits, including less pain, shorter length of stay, improved cosmesis, and quicker return to preoperative level of functional activity. The additional benefits offered by robotic surgical systems include improved dexterity and degrees of freedom, tremor-free movements, ambidexterity, and the avoidance of the fulcrum effect that is intrinsic when using long-shaft endoscopic instruments. Also, optics and operative visualization are vastly improved compared with direct vision and traditional videoscopes. Robotic systems have been utilized successfully to perform complex mitral valve repairs, coronary revascularization, atrial fibrillation ablation, intracardiac tumor resections, atrial septal defect closures, and left ventricular lead implantation. The history and evolution of these procedures, as well as the present status and future directions of robotic cardiac surgery, are presented in this review.

Robotic surgical training.

In July 2000, the da Vinci Surgical System (Intuitive Surgical, Inc) received Food and Drug Administration approval for intracardiac applications, and the first mitral valve repair was done at the East Carolina Heart Institute in May 2000. The system is now approved and used in many surgical specialties. With this disruptive technology and accepted use, surgeons and hospitals are seeking the most efficacious training pathway leading to safe use and responsible credentialing.One of the most important issues related to safe use is assembling the appropriate team of professionals involved with patient care. Moreover, proper patient selection and setting obtainable goals are also important.Creation and maintenance of a successful program are discussed in the article focusing on realistic goals. This begins with a partnership between surgeon leaders, hospital administrators, and industry support. Through this partnership, an appropriate training pathway and clinical pathway for success can be outlined. A timeline can then be created with periods of data analysis and adjustments as necessary. A successful program is attainable by following this pathway and attending to every detail along the journey.

540 consecutive robotic mitral valve repairs including concomitant atrial fibrillation cryoablation.

BACKGROUND: The first complete robotic mitral valve repairs (RMVP) and RMVP with CryoMaze (RMVP+C) were done in the United States in May 2000 and October 2003, respectively. We have previously reported our initial 300 isolated RMVPs. Our current study evaluates our consecutive RMVP series, including patients undergoing concomitant atrial fibrillation (AF) cryoablation. METHODS: Between May 2000 and April 2010, patients with symptomatic, nonischemic, moderate to severe mitral insufficiency with or without AF were studied. Robotic CryoMaze included both right and left atrial lesion sets. Data were collected prospectively on all patients. Procedures were performed with the three-dimensional da Vinci telesurgical system. Postoperative rhythm was followed up 6 weeks later; 3, 6, and 12 months later, and yearly thereafter with the Cardionet home monitoring system, Holter monitor, and/or serial electrocardiograms. An unpaired two-tailed t test was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Five hundred forty patients with either 3+ or 4+ mitral insufficiency underwent repair. Of those 540, 454 (84.1%) underwent RMVP and 86 (15.9%) underwent RMVP+C. The patients' mean ages in the RMVP and RMVP+C groups were 56.1 ± 12.9 and 65.6 ± 10.8 years, respectively (mean ± SD) (p < 0.001). Furthermore, mean cardiopulmonary bypass and cross-clamp times for RMVP and RMVP+C were 153.2 ± 37.7 minutes vs. 188.5 ± 53.8 minutes, and 116.6 ± 31.5 minutes vs. 130.6 ± 28.4 minutes, respectively (p < 0.001). Postrepair transesophageal echocardiography showed 447 (82.8%) patients with no mitral insufficiency, 80 (14.8%) with trace, 12 (2.2%) with mild, and 3 (0.6%) with moderate mitral insufficiency. In those who underwent RMVP+C, freedom from AF without taking antiarrhythmic drugs or warfarin was achieved in 96.5% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Although patients were significantly older and operative times were significantly longer for patients having RMVP+C, the results for both successful repair and conversion to sinus rhythm were comparable to published standards. As comfort level is achieved and robotic technology advances, endoscopic repairs and surgical treatment for AF may become a standard.

Impact of timing and surgical approach on outcomes after mitral valve regurgitation operations.

BACKGROUND: This study investigated whether the timing of mitral valve (MV) repair or surgical approach affects outcomes in patients with MV regurgitation. METHODS: Between 1992 and 2009, 2,255 patients underwent MV operations, including 1,305 with isolated MV regurgitation operations (1,054 repairs, 251 replacements). Surgical approaches were sternotomy in 377, video-assisted right minithoracotomy in 481, or robot-assisted in 447. Mean follow-up was 6.4±4.5 years (maximum, 19 years). RESULTS: Sternotomy MV repairs decreased during the study while minimally invasive MV repairs increased. Robotic MV repair patients were younger, with fewer women, had better left ventricular ejection fractions, and were more likely to have myxomatous degeneration (all p<0.001). The robotic approach led to a higher MV repair rate and increased use of leaflet/chordal procedures but had longer cardiopulmonary bypass and aortic cross-clamp times (all p<0.001). The 30-day mortality for isolated MV repair was similar for all approaches (p=0.409). Fewer neurological events were observed in the videoscopic and robotic groups (p=0.013). Adjusted survival was similar for all approaches (p=0.357). Survival in patients in New York Heart Association class I to II with myxomatous degeneration or annular dilatation was similar to a matched population but was worse for patients in class III to IV or undergoing MV replacement. CONCLUSIONS: MV repair in patients with severe MV regurgitation should be performed before New York Heart Association class III to IV symptoms develop. Minimally invasive MV repair techniques render similar outcomes as the sternotomy approach.

Fifteen-year experience with minimally invasive approach for reoperations involving the mitral valve.

OBJECTIVE: Reoperative sternotomy to address mitral valve pathology carries substantial risk, especially with patent bypass grafts or an aortic valve prosthesis. We previously reported our early experience with minimally invasive right thoracotomy and peripheral cannulation as an alternative strategy, and we recently reviewed our cumulative 15-year hospital outcomes with this approach. METHODS: Between June 1996 and April 2010, we performed right minithoracotomy for reoperations involving the mitral valve on 167 patients, 85 (51%) of these since 2006. Seventy-one percent had undergone previous coronary artery bypass grafting and 38% a previous valve procedure. Fibrillatory arrest was used in 77% and aortic clamping and root cardioplegia in 23%. Nineteen procedures were performed with robotic assistance. RESULTS: Mitral repair frequency increased during each 5-year interval of our experience (1996-2000, 43%; 2001-2005, 53%; 2006-2010, 72%; P = .019), including 80% of native mitral valves without stenosis. Concomitant procedure frequency, most commonly atrial fibrillation ablation, also increased during each 5-year interval (0%, 21%, 48%; P < .0001). Thirty-day mortality was 3.0% (5/167), 0% since 2005. There were no conversions to sternotomy or aortic dissections. Stroke, in 2.4% (4/167), was statistically unrelated to fibrillatory arrest. Increased New York Heart Association functional class (odds ratio, 5.6; 95% confidence interval 1.1-27.8; P = .037) was the only independent predictor of mortality in multivariable analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Our updated experience confirmed the effectiveness of minimally invasive right thoracotomy to treat mitral pathology while avoiding reoperative sternotomy risk. We found fibrillatory and cardioplegic arrest methods to be safe myocardial preservation strategies with this approach.

Minimally invasive versus open mitral valve surgery: a consensus statement of the international society of minimally invasive coronary surgery (ISMICS) 2010.

OBJECTIVE: : The purpose of this consensus conference was to deliberate the evidence regarding whether minimally invasive mitral valve surgery via thoracotomy improves clinical and resource outcomes compared with conventional open mitral valve surgery via median sternotomy in adults who require surgical intervention for mitral valve disease. METHODS: : Before the consensus conference, the consensus panel reviewed the best available evidence up to March 2010, whereby systematic reviews, randomized trials, and nonrandomized trials were considered in descending order of validity and importance. The accompanying meta-analysis article in this issue of the Journal provides the systematic review of the evidence. Based on this systematic review, evidence-based statements were created for prespecified clinical questions, and consensus processes were used to derive recommendations. The American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology system was used to label the level of evidence and class of each recommendation. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: : Considering the underlying level of evidence, and notwithstanding the limitations of the evidence base (retrospective studies with important differences in baseline patient characteristics, which may produce bias in results of the evidence syntheses), the consensus panel provided the following evidence-based statements and overall recommendation:In patients with mitral valve disease, minimally invasive surgery may be an alternative to conventional mitral valve surgery (Class IIb), given that there was comparable short-term and long-term mortality (level B), comparable in-hospital morbidity (renal, pulmonary, cardiac complications, pain perception, and readmissions) (level B), reduced sternal complications, transfusions, postoperative atrial fibrillation, duration of ventilation, and intensive care unit and hospital length of stay (level B). However, this should be considered against the increased risk of stroke (2.1% vs 1.2%) (level B), aortic dissection (0.2% vs 0%) (level B), phrenic nerve palsy (3% vs 0%) (level B), groin infections/complications (2% vs 0%) (level B), and, prolonged cross-clamp time, cardiopulmonary bypass time, and procedure time (level B). The available evidence consists almost entirely of observational studies and must not be considered definitive until future adequately controlled randomized trials further address the risk of stroke, aortic complications, phrenic nerve complications, pain, long-term survival, need for reintervention, quality of life, and cost-effectiveness.

Minimally invasive versus conventional open mitral valve surgery: a meta-analysis and systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: : This meta-analysis sought to determine whether minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (mini-MVS) improves clinical outcomes and resource utilization compared with conventional open mitral valve surgery (conv-MVS) in patients undergoing mitral valve repair or replacement. METHODS: : A comprehensive search of MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, CTSnet, and databases of abstracts was undertaken to identify all randomized and nonrandomized studies up to March 2010 of mini-MVS through thoracotomy versus conv-MVS through median sternotomy for mitral valve repair or replacement. Outcomes of interest included death, stroke, myocardial infarction, aortic dissection, need for reintervention, and any other reported clinically relevant outcomes or indicator of resource utilization. Relative risk and weighted mean differences and their 95% confidence intervals were analyzed as appropriate using the random effects model. Heterogeneity was measured using the I statistic. RESULTS: : Thirty-five studies met the inclusion criteria (two randomized controlled trials and 33 nonrandomized studies). The mortality rate after mini-MVS versus conv-MVS was similar at 30 days (1.2% vs 1.5%), 1 year (0.9% vs 1.3%), 3 years (0.5% vs 0.5%), and 9 years (0% vs 3.7%). A number of clinical outcomes were significantly improved with mini-MVS versus conv-MVS including atrial fibrillation (18% vs 22%), chest tube drainage (578 vs 871 mL), transfusions, sternal infection (0.04% vs 0.27%), time to return to normal activity, and patient scar satisfaction. However, the 30-day risk of stroke (2.1% vs 1.2%), aortic dissection/injury (0.2% vs 0%), groin infection (2% vs 0%), and phrenic nerve palsy (3% vs 0%) were significantly increased for mini-MVS versus conv-MVS. Other clinical outcomes were similar between groups. Cross-clamp time, cardiopulmonary bypass time, and procedure time were significantly increased with mini-MVS; however, ventilation time and length of stay in intensive care unit and hospital were reduced. CONCLUSIONS: : Current evidence suggests that mini-MVS maybe associated with decreased bleeding, blood product transfusion, atrial fibrillation, sternal wound infection, scar dissatisfaction, ventilation time, intensive care unit stay, hospital length of stay, and reduced time to return to normal activity, without detected adverse impact on long-term need for valvular reintervention and survival beyond 1 year. However, these potential benefits for mini-MVS may come with an increased risk of stroke, aortic dissection or aortic injury, phrenic nerve palsy, groin infections/complications, and increased cross-clamp, cardiopulmonary bypass, and procedure time. Available evidence is largely limited to retrospective comparisons of small cohorts comparing mini-MVS versus conv-MVS that provide only short-term outcomes. Given these limitations, randomized controlled trials with adequate power and duration of follow-up to measure clinically relevant outcomes are recommended to determine the balance of benefits and risks.