Psychometric Properties of the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire in a Surgical Population of Patients With Aortic Valve Stenosis.

The 12-item version of the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ-12) was originally developed for patients with heart failure but has been used and tested among patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) who underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Whether the instrument is suitable for patients with AS who underwent surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) is currently unknown. Thus, we aimed to investigate the psychometric properties of the KCCQ-12 before and after SAVR among patients with severe AS. We conducted a prospective cohort of 184 patients with AS who completed the KCCQ-12 and the EuroQol 5 Dimension 5 Levels before and 4 weeks after surgery. Construct validity was investigated with hypothesis testing and an analysis of Spearman's correlation between the two instruments. Structural validity was investigated with explorative and confirmatory factor analyses and reliability with Cronbach's α. All analyses were conducted on data from the two time points (preoperatively and four weeks after surgery). The hypothesis testing revealed how the New York Heart Association class was significantly correlated with the preoperative KCCQ-12 total score (higher New York Heart Association class, worse score). A longer length of hospital stay and living alone were significantly associated with poorer postoperative KCCQ-12 total score. KCCQ-12 and EuroQol 5 Dimension 5 Levels were moderately correlated in most domains/the total score/Visual Analogue Scale score. Principal component analyses revealed two 3-factor structures. The confirmatory factor analyses did not support the original model at any time point. Cronbach's α ranged from 0.22 to 0.84 in three preoperative factors and from 0.39 to 0.76 in the postoperative factors. The total Cronbach's α was 0.83 for the suggested preoperative 3-factor model and 0.83 for the postoperative model. In conclusion, the Danish version of the KCCQ-12 tested in a population of patients with AS who underwent SAVR appears to have acceptable construct validity, whereas structural validity cannot be confirmed for the original four-factor model. Overall reliability is good.

The road to a transcatheter edge-to-edge repair: patient experiences leading up to the procedure and in the early recovery period.

AIMS: Mitral valve transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (TEER) is a minimally invasive treatment option for patients with severe symptomatic mitral regurgitation who are at increased risk for cardiac surgery and are receiving optimal medical therapy. Little is known about patients' perspectives on their journey of care, including their experiences leading up to treatment and their early recovery period. The aim of this study was to explore patients' experiences of their journey to TEER and their perspectives on early recovery. METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted a qualitative study using interpretive description. A purposive sample of 12 patients from a purposive sample, 3-6 monthspost-TEER procedure, were recruited from a tertiary hospital. The median age of the patients was 79 years, with seven males and five females. Data collection included semi-structured interviews over the phone. Data analysis followed an iterative process and utilized thematic analysis. There were four central themes highlighting the experiences of the patients leading up to their procedure: (i) escalating challenges with everyday life; (ii) plummeting losses; (iii) choosing and readiness to proceed with TEER; and (iv) the long and uncertain waiting time. The theme-improved health status highlights the experiences of patients in their early recovery. CONCLUSION: Patients' experiences of waiting for TEER are complex and involve multifaceted challenges related to their worsening cardiac symptoms and navigating the healthcare system. Therefore, care pathways must be put in place to provide continuity of care and support.

Economics of Minimalist Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Results From the 3M-TAVR Economic Study.

BACKGROUND: The 3M-TAVR trial (3M-Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement) demonstrated the feasibility and safety of next-day hospital discharge after transfemoral TAVR with implementation of a minimalist pathway. However, the economic impact of this approach is unknown. Therefore, we evaluated costs for patients undergoing minimalist TAVR compared with conventional TAVR. METHODS: We used propensity matching to compare resource utilization and costs (from a US health care system perspective) for patients in the 3M-TAVR trial with those for transfemoral TAVR patients enrolled in the contemporaneous S3i trial (PARTNER SAPIEN-3 Intermediate Risk). Procedural costs were estimated using measured resource utilization for both groups. For the S3i group, all other costs through 30-day follow-up were assessed by linkage with Medicare claims; for 3M, these costs were assessed using regression models derived from S3i cost and resource utilization data. RESULTS: After 1:1 propensity matching, 351 pairs were included in our study (mean age 82, mean Society of Thoracic Surgery risk score 5.3%). There were no differences in death, stroke, or rehospitalization between the 3M-TAVR and S3i groups through 30-day follow-up. Index hospitalization costs were $10 843/patient lower in the 3M-TAVR cohort, driven by reductions in procedure duration, anesthesia costs, and length of stay. Between discharge and 30 days, costs were similar for the 2 groups such that cumulative 30-day costs were $11 305/patient lower in the 3M-TAVR cohort compared with the S3i cohort ($49 425 versus $60 729, 95% CI for difference $9378 to $13 138; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with conventional transfemoral TAVR, use of a minimalist pathway in intermediate-risk patients was associated with similar clinical outcomes and substantial in-hospital cost savings, which were sustained through 30 days. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT02287662.

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Cardiac Procedure Wait List Mortality in Ontario, Canada.

BACKGROUND: The novel SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic has dramatically altered the delivery of healthcare services, resulting in significant referral pattern changes, delayed presentations, and procedural delays. Our objective was to determine the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on all-cause mortality in patients awaiting commonly performed cardiac procedures. METHODS: Clinical and administrative data sets were linked to identify all adults referred for: (1) percutaneous coronary intervention; (2) coronary artery bypass grafting; (3) valve surgery; and (4) transcatheter aortic valve implantation, from January 2014 to September 2020 in Ontario, Canada. Piece-wise regression models were used to determine the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on referrals and procedural volume. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were used to determine the effect of the pandemic on waitlist mortality for the 4 procedures. RESULTS: We included 584,341 patients who were first-time referrals for 1 of the 4 procedures, of whom 37,718 (6.4%) were referred during the pandemic. The pandemic period was associated with a significant decline in the number of referrals and procedures completed compared with the prepandemic period. Referral during the pandemic period was a significant predictor for increased all-cause mortality for the percutaneous coronary intervention (hazard ratio, 1.83; 95% confidence interval, 1.47-2.27) and coronary artery bypass grafting (hazard ratio, 1.96; 95% confidence interval, 1.28-3.01), but not for surgical valve or transcatheter aortic valve implantation referrals. Procedural wait times were shorter during the pandemic period compared with the prepandemic period. CONCLUSIONS: There was a significant decrease in referrals and procedures completed for cardiac procedures during the pandemic period. Referral during the pandemic was associated with increased all-cause mortality while awaiting coronary revascularization.

Association between frailty and self-reported health following heart valve surgery.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge about the association between frailty and self-reported health among patients undergoing heart valve surgery remains sparse. Thus, the objectives were to I) describe changes in self-reported health at different time points according to frailty status, and to II) investigate the association between frailty status at discharge and poor self-reported health four weeks after discharge among patients undergoing heart valve surgery. METHODS: In a prospective cohort study, consecutive patients undergoing heart valve surgery, including transapical/transaortic valve procedures were included. Frailty was measured using the Fried score, and self-reported health using the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) and the EuroQoL-5 Dimensions 5-Levels Health Status Questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L).To investigate the association between frailty and self-reported health, multivariable logistic regression models were used. Analyses were adjusted for sex, age, surgical risk evaluation (EuroScore) and procedure and presented as odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: Frailty was assessed at discharge in 288 patients (median age 71, 69% men); 51 patients (18%) were frail. In the multivariable analyses, frailty at discharge remained significantly associated with poor self-reported health at four weeks, OR (95% CI): EQ-5D-5L Index 3.38 (1.51-7.52), VAS 2.41 (1.13-5.14), and KCCQ 2.84 (1.35-5.97). CONCLUSION: Frailty is present at discharge in 18% of patients undergoing heart valve surgery, and being frail is associated with poor self-reported health at four weeks of follow-up. This supports a clinical need to address the unique risk of frail patients among heart valve teams broadly, and not only to measure frailty as a marker of operative risk.

Priorities for Patient-Centered Research in Valvular Heart Disease: A Report From the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Working Group.

Over the past decade, the field of valvular heart disease (VHD) has rapidly transformed, largely as a result of the development and improvement of less invasive transcatheter approaches to valve repair or replacement. This transformation has been supported by numerous well-designed randomized trials, but they have centered almost entirely on devices and procedures. Outside this scope of focus, however, myriad aspects of therapy and management for patients with VHD have either no guidelines or recommendations based only on expert opinion and observational studies. Further, research in VHD has often failed to engage patients to inform study design and identify research questions of greatest importance and relevance from a patient perspective. Accordingly, the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute convened a Working Group on Patient-Centered Research in Valvular Heart Disease, composed of clinician and research experts and patient advocacy experts to identify gaps and barriers to research in VHD and identify research priorities. While recognizing that important research remains to be done to test the safety and efficacy of devices and procedures to treat VHD, we intentionally focused less attention on these areas of research as they are more commonly pursued and supported by industry. Herein, we present the patient-centered research gaps, barriers, and priorities in VHD and organized our report according to the "patient journey," including access to care, screening and diagnosis, preprocedure therapy and management, decision making when a procedure is contemplated (clinician and patient perspectives), and postprocedure therapy and management. It is hoped that this report will foster collaboration among diverse stakeholders and highlight for funding bodies the pressing patient-centered research gaps, opportunities, and priorities in VHD in order to produce impactful patient-centered research that will inform and improve patient-centered policy and care.

What to expect after open heart valve surgery? Changes in health-related quality of life.

PURPOSE: To (i) describe changes in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) pre-operatively, at discharge, and 4 weeks after discharge following open heart surgery, (ii) compare the performance of the EuroQol Questionnaire (EQ-5D 5L) and the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) against an anchor-based approach, and to (iii) investigate the association between HRQoL and 180-day readmission. METHODS: A prospective, consecutive cohort (single-center study) of 291 patients completed the EQ-5D 5L and KCCQ pre-operatively, at discharge and 4 weeks post-discharge. Changes in HRQoL over time were evaluated, and the performance of the instruments was investigated. The association between HRQoL and readmission were investigated with Cox Proportional Hazard models. RESULTS: Scores of the EQ-5D Index and VAS decreased significantly from the pre-operative assessment to discharge and improved from discharge to 4 weeks after. The KCCQ scores significantly improved from baseline to 4 weeks after. Minimal clinically important improvements from before surgery to 4 weeks after were seen among 24% (EQ-5D Index), 45% (EQ-5D VAS), and 57% (KCCQ). More than one-third experienced worse HRQoL 1 month after discharge. Area under the curve (AUC) (performance of the instruments) demonstrated the following: EQ-5D Index AUC 0.622 (95% CI 0.540-0.704), VAS AUC 0.674 (95% CI 0.598-0.750), and KCCQ AUC 0.722 (95% CI 0.65-0.792). None of the HRQoL measurements were associated with 180-day readmission. CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed that HRQoL measured with the EQ-5D is significantly worse at discharge compared to before surgery, but scores increases within the first month measured with the EQ-5D and the KCCQ. The EQ-5D and KCCQ have a moderate correlation with an anchor-based approach but were not associated with readmission.

The Vancouver 3M (Multidisciplinary, Multimodality, But Minimalist) Clinical Pathway Facilitates Safe Next-Day Discharge Home at Low-, Medium-, and High-Volume Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Centers: The 3M TAVR Study.

OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to prospectively determine the safety and efficacy of next-day discharge using the Vancouver 3M (Multidisciplinary, Multimodality, but Minimalist) Clinical Pathway. BACKGROUND: Transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is an alternative to surgery in high- and intermediate-risk patients; however, hospital stays average at least 6 days in most trials. The Vancouver 3M Clinical Pathway is focused on next-day discharge, made possible by the use of objective screening criteria as well as streamlined peri- and post-procedural management guidelines. METHODS: Patients were enrolled from 6 low-volume (<100 TAVR/year), 4 medium-volume, and 3 high-volume (>200 TAVR/year) centers in Canada and the United States. The primary outcomes were a composite of all-cause death or stroke by 30 days and the proportion of patients successfully discharged home the day following TAVR. RESULTS: Of 1,400 screened patients, 411 were enrolled at 13 centers and received a SAPIEN XT (58.2%) or SAPIEN 3 (41.8%) valve (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, California). In centers enrolling exclusively in the study, 55% of screened patients were enrolled. The median age was 84 years (interquartile range: 78 to 87 years) with a median STS score of 4.9% (interquartile range: 3.3% to 6.8%). Next-day discharge home was achieved in 80.1% of patients, and within 48 h in 89.5%. The composite of all-cause mortality or stroke by 30 days occurred in 2.9% (95% confidence interval: 1.7% to 5.1%), with neither component of the primary outcome affected by hospital TAVR volume (p = 0.51). Secondary outcomes at 30 days included major vascular complication 2.4% (n = 10), readmission 9.2% (n = 36), cardiac readmission 5.7% (n = 22), new permanent pacemaker 5.7% (n = 23), and >mild paravalvular regurgitation 3.8% (n = 15). CONCLUSIONS: Adherence to the Vancouver 3M Clinical Pathway at low-, medium-, and high-volume TAVR centers allows next-day discharge home with excellent safety and efficacy outcomes.

Avoidance of urinary catheterization to minimize in-hospital complications after transcatheter aortic valve implantation: An observational study.

BACKGROUND: Contemporary transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) devices and approach present opportunities to review historical practices initially informed by early treatment development and cardiac surgery. The avoidance of urinary catheterization in the older TAVI population is a strategy to minimize in-hospital complications. The purpose of the study was to explore elimination-related complications following the phased implementation of a default strategy of avoiding urinary catheterization in patients undergoing transfemoral (TF) TAVI. METHODS: We conducted an observational study using a retrospective chart review of patients treated between 2011 and 2013 to identify patient characteristics, peri-procedure details, in-hospital outcomes and elimination-related complications in patients who did or did not receive a peri-procedure indwelling catheter. Descriptive analyses were used to report differences between the groups; we conducted a regression analysis to explore the relationship between the practice of urinary catheterization and total procedure time. RESULTS: Of the 408 patients who underwent TF TAVR, 188 (46.1%) received a peri-procedure indwelling urinary catheter and 220 (53.9%) did not. There was no difference in in-hospital mortality (2.2%), disabling stroke (0.5%), or other major cardiac adverse events. The avoidance of a urinary catheter resulted in significantly lower rates of urinary tract infection requiring a new antibiotic regimen (1.4% versus 6.1%, p = 0.014), haematuria documented by medicine or nursing (3.7% versus 17.6%, p = 0.001), and the need for continuous bladder irrigation (2.7% versus 0%, p = 0.027). CONCLUSION: The avoidance of a urinary catheter may contribute to improved outcomes in patients undergoing TAVI. The intervention should be further evaluated within the broader study of minimalist TAVI.

Transition to palliative care when transcatheter aortic valve implantation is not an option: opportunities and recommendations.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is the recommended treatment for most patients with symptomatic aortic stenosis at high surgical risk. However, TAVI may be clinically futile for patients who have multiple comorbidities and excessive frailty. This group benefits from transition to palliative care to maximize quality of life, improve symptoms, and ensure continuity of health services. We discuss the clinical determination of utility and futility, explore the current evidence guiding the integration of palliative care in procedure-focused cardiac programs, and outline recommendations for TAVI programs. RECENT FINDINGS: The determination of futility of treatment in elderly patients with aortic stenosis is challenging. There is a paucity of research available to guide best practices when TAVI is not an option. Opportunities exist to build on the evidence gained in the management of end of life and heart failure. TAVI programs and primary care providers can facilitate improved communication and processes of care to provide decision support and transition to palliative care. SUMMARY: The increased availability of transcatheter options for the management of valvular heart disease will increase the assessment of people with life-limiting conditions for whom treatment may not be an option. It is pivotal to bridge cardiac innovation and palliation to optimize patient outcomes.

Exploring changes in functional status while waiting for transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

BACKGROUND: Aortic stenosis (AS) is a structural heart disease primarily associated with ageing. For people with multiple co-morbidities, surgical treatment may not be a safe or feasible option. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is indicated for patients with symptomatic AS who are at excessive risk for surgical valve replacement and are likely to derive significant benefit. Functional status can deteriorate during the time between referral and procedure because of the rapid disease progression of severe AS and varying wait-times for treatment in Canada. AIMS: The purpose of this study was to examine changes in functional status between time of eligibility assessment and TAVI procedure date. METHODS: An exploratory prospective cohort study was conducted to evaluate changes in functional status including gait speed, frailty scores and cognitive status. RESULTS: Thirty-two patients participated in the study with median age 81 years. Functional status declined between time of eligibility assessment and time of TAVI: gait speed increased by an average of 0.53 s (standard deviation (SD)=1.0, p=0.01) and frailty scores increased by an average of 0.31 (SD=0.64, p=0.01). Patients waiting longer than six weeks for TAVI had a larger decline in gait speed than patients waiting less than six weeks (p=0.02). Patients living alone had a larger increase in frailty scores compared to patients living with another adult (p=0.05). CONCLUSION: Older adults with life-limiting AS are vulnerable to changes in functional status. In the absence of TAVI wait-time benchmarks, findings may be used to facilitate individualized care and management strategies and inform health-care policy.