The Many Faces of the Interatrial Septum: A Diagnostic Dilemma and Considerations for Defect Closure Device Selection.

PATENT FORAMEN ovales (PFOs) and atrial septal defects (ASDs) are 2 examples of interatrial septal pathology.1 The presence of a PFO is a well-known risk factor for cryptogenic stroke.1,2 Newer evidence over the course of the last decade suggests percutaneous device closure of PFOs significantly reduces the subsequent risk of recurrent stroke.2 Among ASDs, the ostium secundum type is the most common pathology and, due to its anatomy, is most amenable to transcatheter closure.1 The tools that are available to percutaneously close these different pathologies vary, and choosing the correct device for the procedure can have significant impact on the clinical outcome. The authors here present a case that highlights how the differentiation of an ASD from a PFO using 2-dimensional (2D) and 3-dimensional (3D) echocardiography can affect the clinical decision-making and outcome in a challenging structural heart disease case.

CoreValve bioprosthesis dysfunction treated with a Sapien 3 valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve replacement and BASILICA technique.

Structural deterioration of transcatheter heart valve (THV) has been previously described. With the expansion of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) indications toward treating lower risk patients with longer life expectancy, there will be increased necessity of managing the patients with THV dysfunction including those at risk for coronary obstruction or sinus sequestration. Coronary access also remains a challenge in such cases with THV dysfunction undergoing valve-in-transcatheter heart valve (ViTHV) TAVR. A unique and first reported case of THV deterioration treated with Sapien 3 ViTHV-TAVR inside a 31 mm CoreValve bioprosthesis along with left coronary leaflet laceration using the BASILICA technique has been presented.

Functional Status After Transcatheter and Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement: 2-Year Analysis From the SURTAVI Trial.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate patient-centered metrics in intermediate-surgical-risk aortic stenosis patients enrolled in the SURTAVI (Surgical Replacement and Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation) trial treated with self-expanding transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) or surgery. BACKGROUND: Studies have shown TAVR to be an alternative to surgery in patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis but have focused on "hard endpoints," including all-cause mortality and stroke, rather than on comparative patient-centered metrics, such as functional status and symptom burden. METHODS: The study analyzed functional status (6-minute walk test [6MWT]) and symptom burden (Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire) in 1,492 patients from the SURTAVI trial at baseline, 30 days, 1 year, and 2 years. Patients were categorized by baseline functional status into tertiles of slow, medium, and fast walkers. RESULTS: Patients with lowest capacity baseline functional status were commonly women, had higher Society of Thoracic Surgeons scores, and had more New York Heart Association functional class III or IV symptoms; reduced baseline functional status was associated with higher aortic valve- and heart failure-related hospitalization at 2 years. There was greater improvement in 6MWT distance in TAVR compared with surgery patients at 30 days (P < 0.001) and 1 year (P = 0.012), but at 2 years, both groups had similar improvement (P = 0.091). The percentage of patients with large improvement in 6MWT was greatest in patients categorized as slow walkers and lowest in fast walkers. Symptom burden improved after TAVR at 30 days and after both procedures at 1 and 2 years. CONCLUSIONS: In this substudy of patients from the SURTAVI trial, patients receiving TAVR demonstrated a more rapid improvement in functional status and symptom burden compared with patients undergoing surgery; however, both groups had similar improvements in long-term follow-up. (Safety and Efficacy Study of the Medtronic CoreValve® System in the Treatment of Severe, Symptomatic Aortic Stenosis in Intermediate Risk Subjects Who Need Aortic Valve Replacement [SURTAVI]; NCT01586910).

Prevalence and Risk Factors for Preprocedural Medication Errors in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Atrial Flutter.

Perfect adherence to anticoagulant medications is an important aspect of care for patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing cardiac electrophysiology procedures to minimize the risk of stroke. Despite this, adherence remains imperfect as is associated with added cost of additional procedures (e.g., transesophageal echocardiography) and administrative burden. We sought to identify characteristics of such patients and predictors of medication errors at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.

Quality and diagnostic performance of coronary computed tomography angiogram (CCTA): A comparison between pre-liver and pre-kidney transplant patients.

PURPOSE: Assess and compare the quality and diagnostic performance of CCTA between pre-liver and pre-kidney transplant patients, and gauge impact of CCTA on ICA requirements. METHODS: Patients without known coronary artery disease (CAD) were selected for CCTA if considered high-risk or after abnormal stress testing. All pre-liver and pre-kidney CCTAs between March 2018 and August 2020 were retrospectively included. CCTA quality was qualitatively graded as excellent/good/fair/poor, and CAD graded as < or ≥50% stenosis. Heart rate, coronary artery calcium (CAC) scores, and fractional flow reserve CT (FFRCT) results were collected. CAD stenosis was graded on invasive coronary angiogram (ICA) images, with ≥50% stenosis defined as significant. RESULTS: 162 pre-transplant patients (91 pre-liver, 71 pre-kidney). Pre-kidney patients had poorer CCTA quality (p = 0.04) and higher heart rate (median: 65 bpm vs 60 bpm, p < 0.001). Out of 147 diagnostic CCTAs (pre-liver: 84, pre-kidney: 63), 73 (49.7%) had a ≥50% stenosis (pre-liver: 38 (45.2%), pre-kidney:35 (55.6%)). 12/38 (31.6%) had a significantly reduced FFRCT, and 19/53 (35.8%) had ≥50% stenosis on ICA. Among patients whose CCTA was diagnostic and had ICA, stenosis severity was concordant in 10/23 (43.5%) pre-liver and 10/25 (40%) pre-kidney patients. All discordant cases had stenosis 'over-called' on CCTA. CONCLUSION: Diagnostic-quality CCTAs in high-risk pre-transplant patients are achievable and can greatly reduce ICA requirements by excluding significant CAD. CCTA quality is poorer in pre-kidney transplant patients compared to pre-liver, possibly due to higher heart rate.

Lessons for Treating Structural Heart Patients during the COVID-19 Pandemic and Beyond.

Background: We sought to compare characteristics and outcomes of structural heart disease (SHD) patients treated during the regional peak of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic ("COVID era") compared with historical controls. During the COVID era, elective SHD procedures at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center were canceled but urgent cases were still performed. We enacted several practice changes in an effort to minimize complications, prevent COVID transmission, and decrease hospital stay during the pandemic. Methods: Baseline characteristics and outcomes were collected on all patients who underwent SHD procedures during the COVID era and compared with patients treated during the same time period in 2019. Results: Compared with SHD patients treated during 2019 (N = 259), those treated during the COVID era (N = 26) had higher left ventricular end diastolic pressure (LVEDP; 28 vs. 21 mmHg, p = 0.001), and were more likely New York Heart Association class IV (26.9% vs. 10.0%, p = 0.019), but had a lower rate of bleeding/vascular complications (0% vs. 16.2%, p = 0.013), a lower rate of permanent pacemaker implantation (0% vs. 17.4%, p = 0.019), and a greater proportion of patients were discharged on post-operative day 1 (POD#1; 68.2% vs. 22.2%, p < 0.001). Conclusion: Practice changes employed for patients treated during the COVID era were associated with fewer vascular complications, a greater proportion of patients discharged on POD#1, and a lower rate of pacemaker implantation despite more severe illness. As a result, we plan to continue these practices in the post-COVID era.

Percutaneous Management of a Contained Annular Rupture Occurring With Self-Expanding Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.

Annular rupture is a rare catastrophic event during transcatheter aortic valve replacement, often life threatening and requiring emergent surgical repair. We describe, herein, a case of contained annular rupture successfully managed percutaneously with coiling and polymer injection. This is a novel technique to manage this complication. (Level of Difficulty: Advanced.).

Culprit-Only or Complete Revascularization for ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction in Patients with and Without Shock.

ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients with multivessel disease and without shock are a common clinical entity, but the best approach to nonculprit vessel lesions remains controversial. In contrast, STEMI patients with shock do not appear to benefit from primary multivessel percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) during the index procedure. The optimal treatment strategy in a given STEMI patient involves an individualized approach, incorporating clinical, hemodynamic, and angiographic/imaging parameters. Patients with STEMI and cardiogenic shock may benefit from therapies other than PCI, such as mechanical cardiovascular support.

Expedited Removal of a Radial Hemostatic Compression Device Following Cardiac Catheterization Is Safe and Associated With Reduced Time to Discharge.

BACKGROUND: Radial access for cardiac catheterization has become increasingly adopted, owing much of its popularity to decreased bleeding complications compared with the femoral approach. Hemostatic compression devices (HCDs) for radial catheterization play a key role in this advantage, but the optimal duration of compression is unknown. A shorter duration of compression is encouraged by guidelines, but removing an HCD too quickly could result in serious bleeding. We aimed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of expedited removal of a radial HCD after cardiac catheterization. METHODS: We conducted a prospective study of patients undergoing radial cardiac catheterization and/or percutaneous coronary intervention at a tertiary care academic medical center. Patients underwent HCD application using a TR Band® (Terumo Interventional Systems) which was removed after a prespecified amount of time in each of three sequential temporal cohorts: 2-h, 1-h, or 0.5-h. Each patient was monitored for development of bleeding or hematoma and for serious complications. RESULTS: A total of 354 patients participated in our study, with similar numbers in each group. There was a greater rate of minor bleeding in the 0.5-h (12%) and 1-h (19%) groups compared with the 2-h group (8%), but there were no serious complications (need for surgical consultation, transfusion, or unplanned admission) in any group. The average time to discharge was shorter in the 0.5-h and 1-h groups compared with the 2-h group. CONCLUSIONS: Deflating the radial HCD at 0.5 h is safe with no increase in the observed rate of major complications and is associated with reduced time to discharge after coronary angiography or percutaneous coronary intervention using the radial arterial approach.

Prevalence and outcomes of patients receiving implantable cardioverter-defibrillators for primary prevention not based on guidelines.

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation outside practice guidelines remains contentious, particularly during the mandated waiting periods in patients with recent cardiac events. We assessed the prevalence and outcomes of non-guideline-based (NGB) ICD implantations in a tertiary academic medical center, with a specific focus on adjudication of arrhythmia events. All patients who underwent initial primary prevention ICD implantation at our institution from 2004 to 2012 were categorized as having received guideline-based (GB) or NGB implants and were retrospectively assessed for first episode of appropriate ICD therapy and total mortality. Of 807 patients, 137 (17.0%) received NGB implants. During a median follow-up of 2.9 years, patients with NGB implants had similar times to first appropriate ICD therapy (median time to event 1.94 vs 2.17 years in patients with GB implants, p = 0.20). After multivariable analysis, patients with NGB implants remained at higher risk for death (hazard ratio 1.54, 95% confidence interval 1.1 to 2.2, p = 0.03) but not appropriate ICD therapy (hazard ratio 0.83, 95% confidence interval 0.5 to 1.3, p = 0.51). Furthermore, only 1 of 125 patients who underwent implant within the 40-day waiting period after myocardial infarction or 3-month waiting period after revascularization or cardiomyopathy diagnosis received an appropriate therapy within this period. In conclusion, few patients received NGB ICD implants in our academic medical center. Although these patients have similar long-term risk of receiving appropriate ICD therapy compared with patients with GB implants, this risk is very low during the waiting periods mandated by clinical practice guidelines. These results suggest that there is little need to rush into implanting ICDs during these waiting periods.