Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement for Severe Symptomatic Aortic Stenosis in Rheumatic Heart Disease: A Systematic Review.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is well-established for severe symptomatic aortic stenosis (AS), but its use in rheumatic heart disease (RHD) has been limited. We systematically review the use of TAVR for severe symptomatic AS in RHD. Pubmed, Embase, and Scopus were searched for TAVR for symptomatic severe AS and proven or suspected RHD. Procedure characteristics, efficacy, and safety endpoints were collected and all definitions were based on the Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 (VARC-2) criteria. We included 3 case series and 12 case reports, with a total of 43 patients. Mean age was 76 years, 75% were female, and 85% had NYHA class III-IV symptoms. Follow up ranged from 1 to 29 months. Patients were moderate to high risk, with Society of Thoracic Surgery score ranging from 6.1% to 17.6%. The approach was transfemoral in 30 (83%) cases. Procedural success occurred in 37 (86%) patients. Of the 7 patients with periprocedural complications, 4 had valve dislodgement, 1 deployment failure, 1 unplanned cardiopulmonary bypass, and 1 moderate aortic regurgitation. Paravalvular leak was reported in 5 (11.6%) patients. Only 1 patient had heart block requiring pacemaker. Among 13 studies (23 patients), 30-day mortality was 0%. One case series with 19 patients had a 30-day, 1-year, 2-year, and 5-year mortality of 5%, 11%, 31%, and 48%, respectively. TAVR appears feasible for selected patients with rheumatic severe AS, albeit our results indicate a 14% incidence of device failure. Future randomized clinical trials may clarify the role of TAVR in this group.

Cerebral Embolic Protection During Transseptal Biopsy of Left Atrial Mass.

Diagnostic biopsy of a left atrial mass is technically feasible but has the risk of tumor embolization causing stroke or seeding. In this case report, we highlight the technical steps for left atrial mass biopsy under transesophageal echocardiography guidance by using cerebral embolic protection. Pathologic examination disclosed low-grade B-cell lymphoma. (Level of Difficulty: Advanced.).

The Heart Team for Coronary Revascularization Decisions: 2 Illustrative Cases.

The 2021 ACC/AHA/SCAI coronary artery disease revascularization guideline highlights the importance of the multidisciplinary heart team in making patient-centered, evidence-based clinical decisions for patients considered for coronary revascularization. We present 2 cases highlighting aspects of heart team decision making for complex patients with coronary artery disease. (Level of Difficulty: Intermediate.).

2021 ACC/AHA/SCAI Guideline for Coronary Artery Revascularization: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines.

AIM: The executive summary of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association/Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions coronary artery revascularization guideline provides the top 10 items readers should know about the guideline. In the full guideline, the recommendations replace the 2011 coronary artery bypass graft surgery guideline and the 2011 and 2015 percutaneous coronary intervention guidelines. This summary offers a patient-centric approach to guide clinicians in the treatment of patients with significant coronary artery disease undergoing coronary revascularization, as well as the supporting documentation to encourage their use. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 2019 to September 2019, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, CINHL Complete, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through May 2021, were also considered. Structure: Recommendations from the earlier percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass graft surgery guidelines have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians in caring for patients undergoing coronary revascularization. This summary includes recommendations, tables, and figures from the full guideline that relate to the top 10 take-home messages. The reader is referred to the full guideline for graphical flow charts, supportive text, and tables with additional details about the rationale for and implementation of each recommendation, and the evidence tables detailing the data considered in the development of this guideline.

2021 ACC/AHA/SCAI Guideline for Coronary Artery Revascularization: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines.

AIM: The guideline for coronary artery revascularization replaces the 2011 coronary artery bypass graft surgery and the 2011 and 2015 percutaneous coronary intervention guidelines, providing a patient-centric approach to guide clinicians in the treatment of patients with significant coronary artery disease undergoing coronary revascularization as well as the supporting documentation to encourage their use. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 2019 to September 2019, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, CINHL Complete, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through May 2021, were also considered. STRUCTURE: Coronary artery disease remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. Coronary revascularization is an important therapeutic option when managing patients with coronary artery disease. The 2021 coronary artery revascularization guideline provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence for the treatment of these patients. The recommendations present an evidence-based approach to managing patients with coronary artery disease who are being considered for coronary revascularization, with the intent to improve quality of care and align with patients' interests.

2021 ACC/AHA/SCAI Guideline for Coronary Artery Revascularization: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines.

AIM: The executive summary of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association/Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions coronary artery revascularization guideline provides the top 10 items readers should know about the guideline. In the full guideline, the recommendations replace the 2011 coronary artery bypass graft surgery guideline and the 2011 and 2015 percutaneous coronary intervention guidelines. This summary offers a patient-centric approach to guide clinicians in the treatment of patients with significant coronary artery disease undergoing coronary revascularization, as well as the supporting documentation to encourage their use. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 2019 to September 2019, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, CINHL Complete, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through May 2021, were also considered. STRUCTURE: Recommendations from the earlier percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass graft surgery guidelines have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians in caring for patients undergoing coronary revascularization. This summary includes recommendations, tables, and figures from the full guideline that relate to the top 10 take-home messages. The reader is referred to the full guideline for graphical flow charts, supportive text, and tables with additional details about the rationale for and implementation of each recommendation, and the evidence tables detailing the data considered in the development of this guideline.

Determinants of long-term dual antiplatelet therapy use in post myocardial infarction patients: Insights from the TIGRIS registry.

BACKGROUND: Patterns of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) use beyond 1 year post-myocardial infarction (MI) have not been well studied. METHODS: TIGRIS (NCT01866904) was a prospective, multi-center (369 centers in 24 countries), observational study of patients 1 to 3 years post-MI. We sought to identify the prevalence and determinants of DAPT use ≥1 year post-MI in patients enrolled in TIGRIS. We used multivariable logistic regression to identify determinants of DAPT use at 396 days post-MI (365 days plus a 31day overrun period to account for intended DAPT discontinuation at 1 year). Patients treated with an oral anticoagulant were excluded. RESULTS: Of 7708 patients (median age 67 years, women 25%, ST-elevation MI 50%), 39% and 16% were on DAPT at 396 days and 5 years post-MI, respectively. DAPT use at 396 days post-MI was more prevalent in patients <65 years of age, treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (versus coronary artery bypass grafting or medical therapy), and with multivessel disease or a history of angina. Additional clinical determinants of ischemic and/or bleeding events following MI (diabetes, second prior MI, hypertension, peripheral artery disease, heart failure, smoking, and renal insufficiency) were not independently associated with DAPT use at 396 days. There were geographic variations in the use of DAPT at 396 days (p<0.001), with the lowest use in Europe and the highest in Asia and Australia. CONCLUSION: In a contemporary patient cohort, DAPT use beyond 1 year post MI was prevalent and associated with patient and index event characteristics. There were marked geographical variations in DAPT use beyond 1 year post MI.

Health-related quality of life 1-3 years post-myocardial infarction: its impact on prognosis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess associations of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) with patient profile, resource use, cardiovascular (CV) events and mortality in stable patients post-myocardial infarction (MI). METHODS: The global, prospective, observational TIGRIS Study enrolled 9126 patients 1-3 years post-MI. HRQoL was assessed at enrolment and 6-month intervals using the patient-reported EuroQol-5 dimension (EQ-5D) questionnaire, with scores anchored at 0 (worst possible) and 1 (perfect health). Resource use, CV events and mortality were recorded during 2-years' follow-up. Regression models estimated the associations of index score at enrolment with patient characteristics, resource use, CV events and mortality over 2-years' follow-up. RESULTS: Among 8978 patients who completed the EQ-5D questionnaire, 52% reported 'some' or 'severe' problems on one or more health dimensions. Factors associated with a lower index score were: female sex, older age, obesity, smoking, higher heart rate, less formal education, presence of comorbidity (eg, angina, stroke), emergency room visit in the previous 6 months and non-ST-elevation MI as the index event. Compared with an index score of 1 at enrolment, a lower index score was associated with higher risk of all-cause death, with an adjusted rate ratio of 3.09 (95% CI 2.20 to 4.31), and of a CV event, with a rate ratio of 2.31 (95% CI 1.76 to 3.03). Patients with lower index score at enrolment had almost two times as many hospitalisations over 2-years' follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians managing patients post-acute coronary syndrome should recognise that a poorer HRQoL is clearly linked to risk of hospitalisations, major CV events and death. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT01866904) (https://clinicaltrials.gov).

Cardiogenic Shock Management: International Survey of Contemporary Practices.

BACKGROUND: Limited data exist on current cardiogenic shock (CS) management strategies. METHODS: A 48-item open- and closed-ended question survey on the diagnosis and management of CS. RESULTS: A total of 211 respondents (3.2%) completed the survey, including 64% interventional cardiologists, 14% general cardiologists, 11% advanced heart failure cardiologists, 5% intensivists, 3% cardiothoracic surgeons; the remainder were internists, emergency medicine, and other physicians. Nearly half (45%) reported practicing at sites without advanced heart failure support/resources, with neither durable ventricular assist devices nor heart transplant available; 16% practice at sites without on-site cardiac surgery and 6% do not offer 24/7 percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) coverage. The majority (70%) practice in closed intensive care units with multidisciplinary rounding (73%), cardiologists frequently involved in patient care (89%), and involving cardiology-intensivist co-management (41%). Over half (55%) reported use of CS protocols, 61% reported routine arterial line use, 25% reported routine use of pulmonary artery catheter use to guide management and 9% did not. The preferred vasopressor and/or inotrope was norepinephrine (68%). For coronary angiography and PCI, 53% use transradial access, 72% only revascularize the culprit vessel, and 44% institute mechanical circulatory support (MCS) prior to revascularization. Percutaneous MCS availability was as follows: intra-aortic balloon pump (92%), Impella (78%), peripheral veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (66%), and TandemHeart (28%). Most respondents (58%) do not use a scoring system for risk stratification and most (62%) reported that CS-specific cardiac rehabilitation programs were unavailable at their sites. CONCLUSION: Wide variation exists in the care delivered and/or resources available for patients with CS. Our survey suggests opportunities for standardization of care.

Percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass graft surgery for left main coronary artery disease: A meta-analysis of randomized trials.

We aimed to investigate long-term (≥5 years) outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) versus coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for left main coronary artery disease (LMCAD) using a meta-analysis from updated published randomized trials. Our data showed that the risk of all-cause death as well as cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and stroke was similar between PCI and CABG, whereas PCI had significantly higher rates of repeat revascularization compared to CABG. Decisions for PCI versus CABG for LMCAD should be based on weighing the upfront morbidity and mortality risk of CABG with late risk of repeat revascularization with PCI and taking into consideration patient preference.

Older Adults in the Cardiac Intensive Care Unit: Factoring Geriatric Syndromes in the Management, Prognosis, and Process of Care: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.

Longevity is increasing, and more adults are living to the stage of life when age-related biological factors determine a higher likelihood of cardiovascular disease in a distinctive context of concurrent geriatric conditions. Older adults with cardiovascular disease are frequently admitted to cardiac intensive care units (CICUs), where care is commensurate with high age-related cardiovascular disease risks but where the associated geriatric conditions (including multimorbidity, polypharmacy, cognitive decline and delirium, and frailty) may be inadvertently exacerbated and destabilized. The CICU environment of procedures, new medications, sensory overload, sleep deprivation, prolonged bed rest, malnourishment, and sleep is usually inherently disruptive to older patients regardless of the excellence of cardiovascular disease care. Given these fundamental and broad challenges of patient aging, CICU management priorities and associated decision-making are particularly complex and in need of enhancements. In this American Heart Association statement, we examine age-related risks and describe some of the distinctive dynamics pertinent to older adults and emerging opportunities to enhance CICU care. Relevant assessment tools are discussed, as well as the need for additional clinical research to best advance CICU care for the already dominating and still expanding population of older adults.

Predictors and etiologies of 30-day readmissions in patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Despite improvements in acute care and survival after non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) hospitalization, early readmissions remain common, and have significant clinical and financial impact. OBJECTIVES: Determine the predictors and etiologies of 30-day readmissions in NSTE-ACS. METHOD: The study cohort was derived from the National Readmission Database 2014 identifying patients with a primary diagnosis of NSTE-ACS using ICD9 code. RESULTS: We identified a total of 300,269 patients admitted with NSTE-ACS; 13.4% were readmitted within 30-day. The most common cause of readmission was heart failure (HF) (15.6%), followed by a recurrent myocardial infarction (MI) (10%). Predictors of increased readmissions were age ≥ 75 years (OR: 1.34, 95% CI: 1.30-1.39), female gender (OR 1.12, 95% CI 1.09-1.16), a Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) >3 (OR 2.11, 95% CI: 2.04-2.18), ESRD (OR 2.01, 95% CI 1.89-2.14), CKD (OR: 1.58, 95% CI: 1.51-1.64), length of stay ≥5 days (OR: 1.51, 95% CI 1.46-1.56) and adverse events during the index admission such as AKI (OR:1.31, 95% CI: 1.25-1.36), major bleeding (OR:1.20, 95% CI: 1.12-1.24); whereas admission to a teaching hospital (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.89-0.95) and PCI (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.67-0.72) were associated with less likelihood of 30-day readmission. CONCLUSION: Readmission rate at 30-days is high among NSTE-ACS patients and the most common readmission etiologies are HF and recurrent MI. A CCI more than 3 and ESRD were the most significant predictors for readmission; patients undergoing PCI had less odds of readmission.

Drug-Eluting Stents Versus Bare-Metal Stents in Saphenous Vein Graft Intervention.

Background Percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents (DES) has been increasingly used for revascularization of saphenous vein graft stenosis without strong clinical evidence favoring their use. Randomized controlled trials comparing DES versus bare-metal stents (BMS) in saphenous vein graft-percutaneous coronary intervention have been inconclusive. Methods and Results We performed a comprehensive literature search through May 15, 2018, for all eligible studies comparing DES versus BMS in patients with saphenous vein graft stenosis in PubMed, EMBASE, SCOPUS, Google Scholar, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Clinical outcomes included all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, major adverse cardiovascular events, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, and target vessel revascularization. Six randomized controlled trials were eligible and included 1582 patients, of whom 797 received DES and 785 received BMS. The follow-up period ranged from 18 months to 60 months. There was no statistically significant difference between DES and BMS for all-cause mortality (risk ratio [RR],1.11; 95% CI, 0.0.77-1.62; P=0.57), cardiovascular mortality (RR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.64-1.57; P=0.99), major adverse cardiovascular events (RR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.63-1.10; P=20), target vessel revascularization (RR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.48-1.11; P=0.14), myocardial infarction (RR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.48-1.16; P=0.19), or stent thrombosis (RR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.42-2.65; P=0.90). Conclusions In patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for saphenous vein graft lesions, our results showed that there was no significant difference between DES and BMS for mortality, major adverse cardiovascular events, target vessel revascularization, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis.

To revascularize or not before transcatheter aortic valve implantation?

Concomitant coronary artery disease (CAD) and aortic stenosis occur in approximately 60-75% of patients referred for surgical or transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Current guidelines support simultaneous surgical aortic valve replacement and bypass surgery with a class IIa recommendation, based on observational, non-randomized data. With the inception of TAVR, this strategy has been challenged, as observational studies have not shown significant outcome differences in patients with and without CAD treated with TAVR. Performing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with aortic stenosis is safe, but the indication and timing remain controversial. Complete revascularization before TAVR with low residual Syntax score (<8) may be considered in selected cases with extensive, proximal, and severe CAD to improve outcomes. PCI before TAVR may require less contrast and reduce the risk of acute kidney injury, but uninterrupted dual antiplatelet therapy may increase the risk of bleeding during TAVR. Combined PCI and TAVR can be considered for unstable patients with simple lesions or ostial lesions, with risk of coronary occlusion after deployment of the transcatheter heart valve. PCI after TAVR may be considered in patients who remain symptomatic with significant residual ischemia despite optimal medical therapy. In the near future, it is expected that randomized clinical trials will further clarify the indications and role of revascularization in patients undergoing TAVR. In this article we provide an extensive review on the management of CAD in TAVR candidates, including additional considerations on technical aspects, device selection, and adjunctive pharmacological therapies.

Frequency of Complications Including Death from Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Patients With Hepatic Cirrhosis.

Advanced liver disease is a risk factor for cardiac surgery. However, liver dysfunction is not included in cardiac risk assessment models. We sought to identify trends in utilization, complications, and outcomes of patients with cirrhosis who underwent coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG). Using the National Inpatient Sample database, we identified patients with cirrhosis who underwent CABG from 2002 to 2014. Propensity-score matching was used to identify differences in in-hospital mortality and postoperative complications in cirrhosis and noncirrhosis patients. We identified a total of 698,799 CABG admissions of which 2,231 (0.3%) had cirrhosis (mean age 63.6 ± 9.6 years, 74% men, 63% white, mean Charlson co-morbidity index 3.3 ± 1.8). Cardiopulmonary bypass was used in 71% of patients. Mean length of stay was 13.7 ± 11.4 days and hospitalization cost $67,744.6 ± 58,320.4. One or more complications occurred in 44% of cases. After propensity-score matching, patients with cirrhosis had a higher rate of complications (43.9% vs 38.93%; p < 0.001) and in-hospital mortality (7.2% vs 4.07%; p < 0.001) than noncirrhosis patients. On multivariate analysis, cirrhosis and ascites were associated with increased in-hospital mortality (odds ratio 2.87; 95% confidence intervals 2.37 to 3.48) and postoperative complications (odds ratio 5.11; 95% confidence intervals 3.88 to 6.72). In conclusion, patients with cirrhosis constitute a small portion of patients who underwent CABG in the United States but have a higher rate of complications and in-hospital mortality compared with noncirrhosis patients. In-hospital mortality remains high for this subset of patients but has decreased in recent years.

Alternative access for transcatheter aortic valve replacement in older adults: A collaborative study from France and United States.

BACKGROUND: We examined the outcomes of older adults undergoing nontrans-femoral (non-TF) transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) procedures including trans-apical (TA), trans-aortic (TAo), trans-subclavian (TSub), and trans-carotid (TCa) techniques. METHODS AND RESULTS: This is an observational study of all consecutive older patients who underwent non-TF TAVR for symptomatic severe AS with Edwards Sapien (ES), Medtronic CoreValve, ES3 or Lotus Valve at three centers in France and the United States from 04/2008 to 02/2017. Baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes were defined according to VARC-2 criteria. Of 857 patients who received TAVR, 172 (20%) had an alternative access procedure. Of these, 45 (26%) were TA, 67 (39%) TAo, 17 (10%) TSub, and 43 (25%) TCa procedures. The preference for non-TF access site was different between the two countries (US: TA 39%, TAo 52%, TSub 9%; TCa 0% vs. France: TA 9%, TAo 23%, TSub 11%, and TCa 57%, P-value < .001). Most patients who underwent TAo TAVR were older women (median age: TA 82, TAo 84, TSub 81, TCa 81, P-value = 0.043; female gender: TA 32 (27%), TAo 30 (55%), TSub 10 (41%), TCa 27 (37%), P-value = .021). The predicted Society of Thoracic Surgery risk of mortality was similar among groups (TA 7%, TAo 7%, TSub 6%, TCa 7%, P-value= .738). No differences were observed in the frequency of para-valvular leak, intra-procedural bleeding, vascular complications, conversion to open-heart surgery, or development of acute kidney injury. The highest in-hospital mortality was observed in the TAo group (TA 2%, TAo 15%, TSub 0%, TCa 2%, P-value = .014). However, hospital length of stay, one-month, and one-year mortality were similar among non-TF techniques. CONCLUSION: Although regional differences exist in the choice of alternative access techniques, centers with high technical expertise can provide a safe alternative to traditional TF TAVR. TAo TAVR was associated with higher in-hospital mortality than other non-TF approaches, and this may have reflected patient rather than procedural factors. All alternative access techniques had similar mortality rates and clinical outcomes at one-year follow-up. Trans-carotid access is safe and feasible compared to other non-TF access techniques.

Coil embolization to successfully treat annular rupture during transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

Aortic annular rupture is one of the most feared complications of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). This complication often presents as sudden cardiac tamponade with hypotension and requires urgent intervention. The traditional rescue strategy for such cases is emergency surgical intervention, yet the mortality remains high considering most patients who undergo TAVR are not candidates for open heart surgery. As such, there is a need for percutaneous alternatives to treat this critical complication. Here, we describe a case of annular rupture during TAVR that was successfully treated with coil embolization at the rupture site. This case illustrates the use of coil embolization as a treatment strategy in patients with acute aortic annular rupture who are at high-risk for surgical intervention.

Incidence, predictors and clinical outcomes of residual stenosis after aortic valve-in-valve.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to analyse the incidence of prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) and elevated gradients after aortic valve in valve (ViV), and to evaluate predictors and associations with clinical outcomes of this adverse event. METHODS: A total of 910 aortic ViV patients were investigated. Elevated residual gradients were defined as ≥20 mm Hg. PPM was identified based on the indexed effective orifice area (EOA), measured by echocardiography, and patient body mass index (BMI). Moderate and severe PPM (cases) were defined by European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging (EACVI) criteria and compared with patients without PPM (controls). RESULTS: Moderate or greater PPM was found in 61% of the patients, and severe in 24.6%. Elevated residual gradients were found in 27.9%. Independent risk factors for the occurrence of lower indexed EOA and therefore severe PPM were higher gradients of the failed bioprosthesis at baseline (unstandardised beta -0.023; 95% CI -0.032 to -0.014; P<0.001), a stented (vs a stentless) surgical bioprosthesis (unstandardised beta -0.11; 95% CI -0.161 to -0.071; P<0.001), higher BMI (unstandardised beta -0.01; 95% CI -0.013 to -0.007; P<0.001) and implantation of a SAPIEN/SAPIEN XT/SAPIEN 3 transcatheter device (unstandardised beta -0.064; 95% CI -0.095 to -0.032; P<0.001). Neither severe PPM nor elevated gradients had an association with VARC II-defined outcomes or 1-year survival (90.9% severe vs 91.5% moderate vs 89.3% none, P=0.44). CONCLUSIONS: Severe PPM and elevated gradients after aortic ViV are very common but were not associated with short-term survival and clinical outcomes. The long-term effect of poor post-ViV haemodynamics on clinical outcomes requires further evaluation.