Extract from the 2022 ESC Guidelines on cardiovascular assessment and management of patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery - Patient Blood Management.

The 2022 Guidelines on cardiovascular assessment and management of patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery of the European Society of Cardiology are an update on the previous guidelines reported in 2014. The revised guidelines provide standardized perioperative cardiovascular management of surgical patients and emphasis on risk assessment of the patient combined with the inherent risk of the surgical procedure. One of the novelties in these guidelines is the Patient Blood Management programme, which is based on a three pillar concept: preoperative hemoglobin optimization, minimize iatrogenic blood loss and bleeding, and harness tolerance to anemia in an effort to improve patient outcome. In this review, we highlight the three pillars of Patient Blood Management and recommendations made by the 2022 ESC Guidelines on cardiovascular assessment and management of patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery.

[Cardiovascular assessment and management of patients undergoing non-cardiac surgeries - A case based resumé]. / ESC-Leitlinie 2022 ­ Kardiovaskuläre Abklärung und Management von Patienten mit nicht kardialen chirurgischen Eingriffen ­ Eine fallorientierte Zusammenfassung einiger der wichtigsten Neuerungen.

In August 2022, the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) published new guidelines on cardiovascular assessment and management of patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery. In order to cope with the complexity of the patients and the multidisciplinary, representatives of the European Society of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine as well as 2 patient representatives were involved in the development of the published document in addition to authors from the European Society of Cardiology. As a result, the document contains 147 recommendations on this complex topic, with more than half of them being grade I recommendations.The interdisciplinarity and the need for interdisciplinary cooperation in this context is particularly emphasized. Particular attention was also paid to recommendations for action for a structured preoperative risk stratification. The new guidelines also focus on increasing vigilance for perioperative myocardial damage and identifying it at an early stage.In the following article, some of the essential innovations and revisions will be highlighted using practical clinical case studies.

Transcatheter interventions for left-sided valvular heart disease complicated by cardiogenic shock: a consensus statement from the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) in collaboration with the Association for Acute Cardiovascular Care (ACVC) and the ESC Working Group on Cardiovascular Surgery.

Valvular heart disease (VHD) is one of the most frequent causes of heart failure (HF) and is associated with poor prognosis, particularly among patients with conservative management. The development and improvement of catheter-based VHD interventions have broadened the indications for transcatheter valve interventions from inoperable/high-risk patients to younger/lower-risk patients. Cardiogenic shock (CS) associated with severe VHD is a clinical condition with a very high risk of mortality for which surgical treatment is often deemed a prohibitive risk. Transcatheter valve interventions might be a promising alternative in this setting given that they are less invasive. However, supportive scientific evidence is scarce and often limited to small case series. Current guidelines on VHD do not contain specific recommendations on how to manage patients with both VHD and CS. The purpose of this clinical consensus statement, developed by a group of international experts invited by the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) Scientific Documents and Initiatives Committee, is to perform a review of the available scientific evidence on the management of CS associated with left-sided VHD and to provide a rationale and practical approach for the application of transcatheter valve interventions in this specific clinical setting.

[ESC guidelines 2022 on cardiovascular assessment and management of patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery : What is new?] / ESC-Leitlinie 2022 zum kardiovaskulären Assessment und Management von Patienten, die sich einer nichtkardiologischen Operation unterziehen : Was ist neu?

The new European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines on the cardiovascular assessment and management of patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery were published in August 2022. In the preparation of the new document the previous guidelines published in 2014 were completely revised and the recommendations for action were adapted or renewed. Furthermore, the guidelines have been supplemented with some new chapters. The new and revised recommendations result in significant changes for the clinical practice. This particularly applies to the preoperative risk stratification, the perioperative risk management and the detection and management approaches in cases of perioperative and postoperative complications. Cardiovascular biomarkers play a special role in both the preoperative risk stratification and the detection of postoperative complications in combination with appropriate algorithms for action. The perioperative management of antithrombotic treatment (antiplatelet therapy or oral anticoagulation) is becoming increasingly individualized depending on the risk of ischemia or bleeding of the planned surgery. Particular attention is paid to the early detection of perioperative or postoperative myocardial infarctions based on determination of high-sensitivity (hs) cardiac troponin, not least because its association with high risk of morbidity and mortality. In patients with complex cardiovascular diseases, such as severe coronary artery disease, valvular heart diseases or those with ventricular support systems, the decision in an interdisciplinary team is highly recommended.

European Society of Cardiology quality indicators for the cardiovascular pre-operative assessment and management of patients considered for non-cardiac surgery. Developed in collaboration with the European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care.

AIMS: To establish a set of quality indicators (QIs) for the cardiovascular (CV) assessment and management of patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery (NCS). METHODS AND RESULTS: The Quality Indicator Committee of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care (ESAIC) in collaboration with Task Force members of the 2022 ESC Guidelines on CV assessment and management of patients undergoing NCS followed the ESC methodology for QI development. This included (1) identification, by constructing a conceptual framework of care, of domains of the CV assessment, and management of patients with risk factors or established cardiovascular disease (CVD) who are considered for or undergoing NCS, (2) development of candidate QIs following a systematic literature review, (3) selection of the final set of QIs using a modified Delphi method, and (4) evaluation of the feasibility of the developed QIs. In total, eight main and nine secondary QIs were selected across six domains: (1) structural framework (written policy), (2) patient education and quality of life (CV risk discussion), (3) peri-operative risk assessment (indication for diagnostic tests), (4) peri-operative risk mitigation (use of hospital therapies), (5) follow-up (post-discharge assessment), and (6) outcomes (major CV events). CONCLUSION: We present the 2022 ESC/ESAIC QIs for the CV assessment and management of patients with risk factors or established CVD who are considered for or are undergoing NCS y. These indicators are supported by evidence from the literature, underpinned by expert consensus, and align with the 2022 ESC Guidelines on CV assessment and management of patients undergoing NCS.

Data standards for transcatheter aortic valve implantation: the European Unified Registries for Heart Care Evaluation and Randomised Trials (EuroHeart).

AIMS: Standardized data definitions are necessary for the quantification of quality of care and patient outcomes in observational studies and randomised controlled trials (RCTs). The European Unified Registries for Heart Care Evaluation and Randomised Trials (EuroHeart) project of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) aims to create pan-European data standards for cardiovascular diseases and interventions, including transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). METHODS AND RESULTS: We followed the EuroHeart methodology for cardiovascular data standard development. A Working Group of 29 members representing 12 countries was established and included a patient representative, as well as experts in the management of valvular heart disease from the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI), the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging (EACVI) and the Working Group on Cardiovascular Surgery. We conducted a systematic review of the literature and used a modified Delphi method to reach consensus on a final set of variables. For each variable, the Working Group provided a definition, permissible values, and categorized the variable as mandatory (Level 1) or additional (Level 2) based on its clinical importance and feasibility. In total, 93 Level 1 and 113 Level 2 variables were selected, with the level 1 variables providing the dataset for registration of patients undergoing TAVI on the EuroHeart IT platform. CONCLUSION: This document provides details of the EuroHeart data standards for TAVI processes of care and in-hospital outcomes. In the context of EuroHeart, this will facilitate quality improvement, observational research, registry-based RCTs and post-marketing surveillance of devices, and pharmacotherapies. ONE-SENTENCE SUMMARY: The EuroHeart data standards for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) are a set of internationally agreed data variables and definitions that once implemented will facilitate improvement of quality of care and outcomes for patients receiving TAVI.

Dual ProGlide versus ProGlide and FemoSeal for vascular access haemostasis after transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

BACKGROUND: Large-bore arteriotomy for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) requires percutaneous vascular closure devices, but real-world data comparing different closure strategies are limited. AIMS: We sought to compare a dual ProGlide strategy vs a combination of one ProGlide and one FemoSeal for vascular closure after TAVI. METHODS: We retrospectively analysed 874 propensity score-matched patients undergoing TAVI at the Munich University Hospital from August 2018 to October 2020. From August 2018 to August 2019, a dual ProGlide strategy was used for vascular closure. From October 2019 to October 2020, a combination of one ProGlide and one FemoSeal was used. The primary endpoint was defined as access-related major vascular complications or bleeding ≥Type 2 according to Valve Academic Research Consortium 3 criteria. RESULTS: Patients in the dual ProGlide group (n=437) had a higher incidence of the primary endpoint than patients treated with one ProGlide and one FemoSeal (n=437; 11.4% vs 3.0%; p<0.001). Furthermore, they had a higher rate of closure device failure (2.7% vs 0.9%; p=0.044) and more often required unplanned surgery or endovascular treatment (3.9% vs 0.9%; p=0.004). The incidence of death did not differ significantly between groups (3.4% vs 1.6%; p=0.08). CONCLUSIONS: A combined ProGlide and FemoSeal strategy might have the potential to reduce access-related vascular complications following TAVI.

Surgery for infective endocarditis following low-intermediate risk transcatheter aortic valve replacement-a multicentre experience.

OBJECTIVES: With the expansion of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) into intermediate and low risk, the number of TAVR procedures is bound to rise and along with it the number of cases of infective endocarditis following TAVR (TIE). The aim of this study was to review a multicentre experience of patients undergoing surgical intervention for TIE and to analyse the underlying indications and operative results. METHODS: We retrospectively identified and analysed 69 patients who underwent cardiac surgery due to TIE at 9 cardiac surgical departments across Germany. The primary outcome was operative mortality, 6-month and 1-year survival. RESULTS: Median age was 78 years (72-81) and 48(69.6%) were male. The median time to surgical aortic valve replacement was 14 months (5-24) after TAVR, with 32 patients (46.4%) being diagnosed with early TIE. Cardiac reoperations were performed in 17% of patients and 33% underwent concomitant mitral valve surgery. The main causative organisms were: Enterococcus faecalis (31.9%), coagulase-negative Staphylococcus spp. (26.1%), Methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus (15.9%) and viridians group streptococci (14.5%). Extracorporeal life support was required in 2 patients (2.9%) for a median duration of 3 days. Postoperative adverse cerebrovascular events were observed in 13 patients (18.9%). Postoperatively, 9 patients (13.0%) required a pacemaker and 33 patients (47.8%) needed temporary renal replacement therapy. Survival to discharge was 88.4% and survival at 6 months and 1 year was found to be 68% and 53%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that TIE can be treated according to the guidelines for prosthetic valve endocarditis, namely with early surgery. Surgery for TIE is associated with acceptable morbidity and mortality rates. Surgery should be discussed liberally as a treatment option in patients with TIE by the 'endocarditis team' in referral centres.

Hybrid Surgery for Severe Mitral Valve Calcification: Limitations and Caveats for an Open Transcatheter Approach.

Background and Objectives: Mitral stenosis with extensive mitral annular calcification (MAC) remains surgically challenging in respect to clinical outcome. Prolonged surgery time with imminent ventricular rupture and systolic anterior motion can be considered as a complex of causal factors. The aim of our alternative hybrid approach was to reduce the risk of annual rupture and paravalvular leaks and to avoid obstruction of the outflow tract. A review of the current literature was also carried out. Materials and Methods: Six female patients (mean age 76 ± 9 years) with severe mitral valve stenosis and severely calcified annulus underwent an open implantation of an Edwards Sapien 3 prosthesis on cardiopulmonary bypass. Our hybrid approach involved resection of the anterior mitral leaflet, placement of anchor sutures and the deployment of a balloon expanded prosthesis under visual control. Concomitant procedures were carried out in three patients. Results: The mean duration of cross-clamping was 95 ± 31 min and cardiopulmonary bypass was 137 ± 60 min. The perioperative TEE showed in three patients an inconspicuous, heart valve-typical gradient on all implanted prostheses and a clinically irrelevant paravalvular leakage occurred in the anterior annulus. In the left ventricular outflow tract, mild to moderately elevated gradients were recorded. No adverse cerebrovascular events and pacemaker implantations were observed. All but one patient survived to discharge. Survival at one year was 83.3%. Conclusions: This "off label" implantation of the Edwards Sapien 3 prosthesis may be considered as a suitable bail-out approach for patients at high-risk for mitral valve surgery or deemed inoperable due to extensive MAC.

Long-Term Prognostic Impact of Restenosis of the Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Requiring Repeat Revascularization.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the prognostic impact of target lesion revascularization (TLR) of the unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) after stent failure. BACKGROUND: Although drug-eluting stents are safe and effective for treatment of the ULMCA, increased rates of repeat revascularization have been observed. METHODS: This is a patient-level pooled analysis of the randomized ISAR-LEFT-MAIN (Drug-Eluting-Stents for Unprotected Left Main Stem Disease) and ISAR-LEFT-MAIN-2 (Drug-Eluting Stents to Treat Unprotected Coronary Left Main Disease) trials, in which patients underwent stenting of the ULMCA. The present analysis includes patients who underwent angiography during follow-up. Patients with TLR were compared with those without. Additional long-term clinical follow-up after TLR was conducted, and its influence on mortality was evaluated. Mortality was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Predictors of mortality were assessed in a multivariate analysis. RESULTS: A total of 1,001 patients were eligible, of whom 166 experienced TLR. The 5-year mortality rate was 30.2% in patients with TLR compared with 17.3% in those without TLR (p < 0.001). In the multivariate analysis, glomerular filtration rate (-30 ml/min; hazard ratio [HR]: 2.25; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.54 to 3.27; p < 0.001), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (HR: 4.95; 95% CI: 1.33 to 18.42; p = 0.02), and body mass index (+5 kg/m2; HR: 1.61; 95% CI: 1.12 to 2.32; p = 0.01) were independent predictors of mortality after TLR due to left main stent failure. The type of repeat revascularization and the underlying stent did not influence the mortality after TLR of the ULMCA. CONCLUSIONS: Mortality after TLR for left main stent failure is high. Patient-related factors seem to have a greater impact on mortality after TLR than other variables.

Randomized Comparison of Intensified and Standard P2Y12-Receptor-Inhibition Before Elective Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: The SASSICAIA Trial.

BACKGROUND: Even among biomarker-negative patients undergoing elective percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), periprocedural thrombotic and bleeding complications can lead to increased morbidity and mortality. Whether stronger platelet inhibition by an intensified oral loading strategy (ILS) before PCI impacts on outcomes among these patients in contemporary practice remains unclear. METHODS: This multicenter, randomized, assessor-blinded trial tested the hypothesis that in elective PCI prasugrel 60 mg (ILS) is superior to standard loading strategy with clopidogrel 600 mg regarding a composite primary end point of all-cause death, any myocardial infarction, definite/probable stent thrombosis, stroke, or urgent vessel revascularization. After PCI, all patients were on clopidogrel 75 mg/day and aspirin. The trial was terminated prematurely because of slower-than-expected recruitment and funding discontinuation. RESULTS: Of 781 patients included in the final analysis, 382 were assigned to ILS and 399 to standard loading strategy. At 30 days, the primary end point occurred in 66 patients (17.3%) assigned to ILS and 74 patients (18.6%) assigned to standard loading strategy (odds ratio, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.63-1.32]; P=0.64). Any myocardial infarction and Bleeding Academic Research Consortium ≥2 bleeding rates were similar among ILS and standard loading strategy groups 16.2% versus 17.5%, odds ratio, 0.91 (95% CI, 0.62-1.32), P=0.62 and 4.2% versus 4.8%, odds ratio 0.87 (95% CI, 0.44-1.73), P=0.70, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In biomarker-negative stable and unstable angina patients undergoing elective PCI, the trial did not find a conclusive difference in efficacy or safety. This observation should be interpreted in the context of wide CIs and premature termination of the trial. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02548611.