Effect of Cerebral Embolic Protection Devices on CNS Infarction in Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Stroke is a major complication of surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). Objective: To determine the efficacy and adverse effects of cerebral embolic protection devices in reducing ischemic central nervous system (CNS) injury during SAVR. Design, Setting, and Participants: A randomized clinical trial of patients with calcific aortic stenosis undergoing SAVR at 18 North American centers between March 2015 and July 2016. The end of follow-up was December 2016. Interventions: Use of 1 of 2 cerebral embolic protection devices (n = 118 for suction-based extraction and n = 133 for intra-aortic filtration device) vs a standard aortic cannula (control; n = 132) at the time of SAVR. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was freedom from clinical or radiographic CNS infarction at 7 days (± 3 days) after the procedure. Secondary end points included a composite of mortality, clinical ischemic stroke, and acute kidney injury within 30 days after surgery; delirium; mortality; serious adverse events; and neurocognition. Results: Among 383 randomized patients (mean age, 73.9 years; 38.4% women; 368 [96.1%] completed the trial), the rate of freedom from CNS infarction at 7 days was 32.0% with suction-based extraction vs 33.3% with control (between-group difference, -1.3%; 95% CI, -13.8% to 11.2%) and 25.6% with intra-aortic filtration vs 32.4% with control (between-group difference, -6.9%; 95% CI, -17.9% to 4.2%). The 30-day composite end point was not significantly different between suction-based extraction and control (21.4% vs 24.2%, respectively; between-group difference, -2.8% [95% CI, -13.5% to 7.9%]) nor between intra-aortic filtration and control (33.3% vs 23.7%; between-group difference, 9.7% [95% CI, -1.2% to 20.5%]). There were no significant differences in mortality (3.4% for suction-based extraction vs 1.7% for control; and 2.3% for intra-aortic filtration vs 1.5% for control) or clinical stroke (5.1% for suction-based extraction vs 5.8% for control; and 8.3% for intra-aortic filtration vs 6.1% for control). Delirium at postoperative day 7 was 6.3% for suction-based extraction vs 15.3% for control (between-group difference, -9.1%; 95% CI, -17.1% to -1.0%) and 8.1% for intra-aortic filtration vs 15.6% for control (between-group difference, -7.4%; 95% CI, -15.5% to 0.6%). Mortality and overall serious adverse events at 90 days were not significantly different across groups. Patients in the intra-aortic filtration group vs patients in the control group experienced significantly more acute kidney injury events (14 vs 4, respectively; P = .02) and cardiac arrhythmias (57 vs 30; P = .004). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients undergoing SAVR, cerebral embolic protection devices compared with a standard aortic cannula did not significantly reduce the risk of CNS infarction at 7 days. Potential benefits for reduction in delirium, cognition, and symptomatic stroke merit larger trials with longer follow-up. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02389894.

The impact of perioperative stroke and delirium on outcomes after surgical aortic valve replacement.

OBJECTIVE: The effects of stroke and delirium on postdischarge cognition and patient-centered health outcomes after surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) are not well characterized. Here, we assess the impact of postoperative stroke and delirium on these health outcomes in SAVR patients at 90 days. METHODS: Patients (N = 383) undergoing SAVR (41% received concomitant coronary artery bypass graft) enrolled in a randomized trial of embolic protection devices underwent serial neurologic and delirium evaluations at postoperative days 1, 3, and 7 and magnetic resonance imaging at day 7. Outcomes included 90-day functional status, neurocognitive decline from presurgical baseline, and quality of life. RESULTS: By postoperative day 7, 25 (6.6%) patients experienced clinical stroke and 103 (28.5%) manifested delirium. During index hospitalization, time to discharge was longer in patients experiencing stroke (hazard ratio, 0.62; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.42-0.94; P = .02) and patients experiencing delirium (hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.54-0.86; P = .001). At day 90, patients experiencing stroke were more likely to have a modified Rankin score >2 (odds ratio [OR], 5.9; 95% CI, 1.7-20.1; P = .01), depression (OR, 5.3; 95% CI, 1.6-17.3; P = .006), a lower 12-Item Short Form Survey physical health score (adjusted mean difference -3.3 ± 1.9; P = .08), and neurocognitive decline (OR, 7.8; 95% CI, 2.3-26.4; P = .001). Delirium was associated with depression (OR, 2.2; 95% CI, 0.9-5.3; P = .08), lower 12-Item Short Form Survey physical health (adjusted mean difference -2.3 ± 1.1; P = .03), and neurocognitive decline (OR, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.2-4.0; P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: Stroke and delirium occur more frequently after SAVR than is commonly recognized, and these events are associated with disability, depression, cognitive decline, and poorer quality of life at 90 days postoperatively. These findings support the need for new interventions to reduce these events and improve patient-centered outcomes.

The ARUBA trial: current status, future hopes.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Report on the status of an on-going National Institutes of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS)-supported clinical trial of management of unbled brain arteriovenous malformations. SUMMARY OF REVIEW: Begun in April 2007 with 3 centers, the trial has grown to 65 centers, and has randomized 124 patients through mid-June 2010 en route to the planned 400. The current literature continues to support the rationale for the trial. CONCLUSIONS: ARUBA is steadily approaching its monthly randomization goals and has already reached the number needed to test the maximum published interventional complication rates against the minimum hemorrhage rates for natural history.

Proposed Standardized Neurological Endpoints for Cardiovascular Clinical Trials: An Academic Research Consortium Initiative.

Surgical and catheter-based cardiovascular procedures and adjunctive pharmacology have an inherent risk of neurological complications. The current diversity of neurological endpoint definitions and ascertainment methods in clinical trials has led to uncertainties in the neurological risk attributable to cardiovascular procedures and inconsistent evaluation of therapies intended to prevent or mitigate neurological injury. Benefit-risk assessment of such procedures should be on the basis of an evaluation of well-defined neurological outcomes that are ascertained with consistent methods and capture the full spectrum of neurovascular injury and its clinical effect. The Neurologic Academic Research Consortium is an international collaboration intended to establish consensus on the definition, classification, and assessment of neurological endpoints applicable to clinical trials of a broad range of cardiovascular interventions. Systematic application of the proposed definitions and assessments will improve our ability to evaluate the risks of cardiovascular procedures and the safety and effectiveness of preventive therapies.