Serial echocardiography for valve dysfunction and aortic dilation in bicuspid aortic valves.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Complications of bicuspid aortic valve commonly include aortic stenosis, aortic regurgitation, and ascending aortic dilation. The progression of these lesions is not well described. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed 249 bicuspid aortic valve patients with at least two echocardiograms from 2006 to 2016. Valve morphology (right-left or right-noncoronary cusp fusion) was confirmed by visual inspection, and aortic stenosis and regurgitation were quantified according to current guidelines; the ascending aorta was measured at end-systole 2-3 cm above the sinotubular junction. Annualized progression of stenosis, regurgitation, and aortic dilation from first to most recent echocardiogram were compared between right-left and right-nonfused valves using multivariable logistic regression to adjust for baseline differences in groups. RESULTS: Among 249 bicuspid aortic valve patients (mean age 47.6 ± 13.5 years, 66.3% male), 75.9% had right-left cusp fusion. At baseline, aortic stenosis was absent or mild in 80.3%; aortic regurgitation was absent or mild in 80.7%; and aortic diameters were 35.0 ± 5.7 mm (sinuses of Valsalva) and 37.4 ± 6.2 mm (ascending). Mean annualized decrease in aortic valve area was 0.07 cm2 /year, with 30% of bicuspid aortic valve patients progressing ≥0.1 cm2 /year. Aortic regurgitation progressed ≥1 grade in 37 patients. Mean annualized increase in ascending aorta diameter was 0.36 mm/year in right-left and 0.65 mm/year in right-nonbicuspid valves. CONCLUSIONS: In this serial echocardiographic study of bicuspid aortic valve patients, cusp orientation was not associated with progression of valve dysfunction. Right-noncoronary cusp fusion was associated with ascending aortic diameter progression.

Transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in intermediate-risk patients: Evidence from a meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in comparison to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in intermediate-risk patients. BACKGROUND: TAVR is an established treatment option in high-risk patients with severe aortic valve stenosis (AS). There are fewer data regarding efficacy of TAVR in intermediate-risk patients. METHODS: Databases were searched through April 30, 2016 for studies that compared TAVR with SAVR for the treatment of intermediate-risk patients with severe AS. We calculated summary risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) with the random-effects model. RESULTS: The analysis included 4,601 patients from 7 studies (2 randomized and 5 observational). There was no significant difference in all-cause mortality between the two groups after mean follow-up of 1.15 years [14.7% with TAVR vs 15.4% with SAVR; RR 0.93; 95% CI 0.77-1.12]. TAVR resulted in lower rates of acute kidney injury [number needed to treat (NNT) = 26], major bleeding (NNT = 4), and atrial-fibrillation (NNT = 6), but higher rates of major vascular complications [number needed to harm (NNH)= 18], and moderate/severe aortic regurgitation (NNH = 13). The rate of permanent-pacemaker implantation was significantly higher with TAVR in observational studies (RR 2.31; 95% CI 1.22-2.81), but not in RCTs (RR 1.21; 95% CI 0.93-1.56). No significant difference in the rate of stroke or myocardial infarction was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis of mid-term results showed that TAVR has similar clinical efficacy to SAVR in intermediate-risk patients with severe AS, and can be a suitable alternative to surgical valve replacement. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Twenty-five years of observations from the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD) and its impact on the cardiovascular scientific community.

OBJECTIVE: The International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD) celebrated its 25th anniversary in January 2021. This study evaluated IRAD's role in promoting the understanding and management of acute aortic dissection (AD) over these years. METHODS: IRAD studies were identified, analyzed, and ranked according to their citations per year (c/y) to determine the most-cited IRAD studies and topics. A systematic search of the literature identified cardiovascular guidelines on the diagnosis and management of acute AD. Consequently, IRAD's presence and impact were quantified using these documents. RESULTS: Ninety-seven IRAD studies were identified, of which 82 obtained more than 10 cumulative citations. The median c/y index was 7.33 (25th-75th percentile, 4.01-16.65). Forty-two studies had a greater than median c/y index and were considered most impactful. Of these studies, most investigated both type A and type B AD (n = 17, 40.5%) and short-term outcomes (n = 26, 61.9%). Nineteen guideline documents were identified from 26 cardiovascular societies located in Northern America, Europe, and Japan. Sixty-nine IRAD studies were cited by these guidelines, including 38 of the 42 most-impactful IRAD studies. Among them, partial thrombosis of the false lumen as a predictor of postdischarge mortality and aortic diameters as a predictor of type A occurrence were determined as most-impactful specific IRAD topics by their c/y index. CONCLUSIONS: IRAD has had and continues to have an important role in providing observations, credible knowledge, and research questions to improve the outcomes of patients with acute AD.

Aortic diameter >or = 5.5 cm is not a good predictor of type A aortic dissection: observations from the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD).

BACKGROUND: Studies of aortic aneurysm patients have shown that the risk of rupture increases with aortic size. However, few studies of acute aortic dissection patients and aortic size exist. We used data from our registry of acute aortic dissection patients to better understand the relationship between aortic diameter and type A dissection. METHODS AND RESULTS: We examined 591 type A dissection patients enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection between 1996 and 2005 (mean age, 60.8 years). Maximum aortic diameters averaged 5.3 cm; 349 (59%) patients had aortic diameters <5.5 cm and 229 (40%) patients had aortic diameters <5.0 cm. Independent predictors of dissection at smaller diameters (<5.5 cm) included a history of hypertension (odds ratio, 2.17; 95% confidence interval, 1.03 to 4.57; P=0.04), radiating pain (odds ratio, 2.08; 95% confidence interval, 1.08 to 4.0; P=0.03), and increasing age (odds ratio, 1.03; 95% confidence interval, 1.00 to 1.05; P=0.03). Marfan syndrome patients were more likely to dissect at larger diameters (odds ratio, 14.3; 95% confidence interval, 2.7 to 100; P=0.002). Mortality (27% of patients) was not related to aortic size. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients with acute type A acute aortic dissection present with aortic diameters <5.5 cm and thus do not fall within current guidelines for elective aneurysm surgery. Methods other than size measurement of the ascending aorta are needed to identify patients at risk for dissection.

Comparison of anticoagulant and anti-inflammatory responses using enoxaparin versus unfractionated heparin for transesophageal echocardiography-guided cardioversion of atrial fibrillation.

The Assessment of Cardioversion Using Transesophageal Echocardiography (ACUTE) II study compared enoxaparin with unfractionated heparin (UFH) as bridging therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation >2 days in duration who underwent transesophageal echocardiography-guided cardioversion. In the present study, the anticoagulant and anti-inflammatory effects of enoxaparin and UFH were compared at prespecified time points. In a randomized substudy of 155 patients from 17 clinical sites, the anticoagulant activity of enoxaparin (n = 76) was compared with that of UFH (n = 79). Blood samples were drawn at enrollment, on day 2, and on day 4 in the 2 groups. Blood samples were evaluated for anticoagulant activity by measuring the activated partial thromboplastin time, anti-Xa, anti-IIa, and tissue factor pathway inhibitor levels. In addition, levels of coagulation activation (by thrombin antithrombin complex) and inflammation (by highly sensitive C-reactive protein) were measured. The results of this substudy showed that the anti-Xa levels in the 2 groups increased on day 2. Similar increases in anti-Xa were observed on day 4. The anti-Xa levels and tissue factor pathway inhibitor levels were higher in the enoxaparin group compared with the UFH group on days 2 and 4. However, as expected, the anti-IIa levels in the UFH group were higher. In addition, markers of coagulation activation and inflammation were increased in patients with atrial fibrillation. Treatment with enoxaparin significantly decreased thrombin antithrombin complex levels compared with treatment with UFH. Highly sensitive C-reactive protein levels were also decreased after treatment in the 2 groups. In conclusion, the ACUTE II study showed that the use of enoxaparin for bridging therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation who underwent transesophageal echocardiography-guided cardioversion resulted in a more predictable and stronger anticoagulant response than that observed with UFH. Markers of inflammation were also decreased in the 2 groups.

Acute intramural hematoma of the aorta: a mystery in evolution.

BACKGROUND: The definition, prevalence, outcomes, and appropriate treatment strategies for acute intramural hematoma (IMH) continue to be debated. METHODS AND RESULTS: We studied 1010 patients with acute aortic syndromes who were enrolled in the International Registry of Aortic Dissection (IRAD) to delineate the prevalence, presentation, management, and outcomes of acute IMH by comparing these patients with those with classic aortic dissection (AD). Fifty-eight (5.7%) patients had IMH, and this cohort tended to be older (68.7 versus 61.7 years; P<0.001) and more likely to have distal aortic involvement (60.3% versus 35.3%; P<0.001) compared with 952 patients with AD. Patients with IMH described more severe initial pain than did those with AD but were less likely to have ischemic leg pain, pulse deficits, or aortic valve insufficiency; moreover, they required a longer time to diagnosis and more diagnostic tests. Overall mortality of IMH was similar to that of classic AD (20.7% versus 23.9%; P=0.57), as was mortality in patients with IMH of the descending aorta (8.3% versus 13.1%; P=0.60) and the ascending aorta (39.1% versus 29.9%; P=0.34) compared with AD. IMH limited to the aortic arch was seen in 7 patients, with no deaths, despite medical therapy in only 6 of the 7 individuals. Among the 51 patients whose initial diagnostic study showed IMH only, 8 (16%) progressed to AD on a serial imaging study. CONCLUSIONS: The IRAD data demonstrate a 5.7% prevalence of IMH in patients with acute aortic syndromes. Like classic AD, IMH is a highly lethal condition when it involves the ascending aorta and surgical therapy should be considered, but this condition is less critical when limited to the arch or descending aorta. Fully 16% of patients have evidence of evolution to dissection on serial imaging.

Differences in clinical presentation, management, and outcomes of acute type a aortic dissection in patients with and without previous cardiac surgery.

BACKGROUND: There are less data on the clinical and diagnostic imaging characteristics, management, and outcomes of patients with previous cardiac surgery (PCS) presenting with acute type A aortic dissection (AAD). METHODS AND RESULTS: In 617 patients with AAD, we evaluated the differences in the clinical characteristics, management, and in-hospital outcomes of the cohorts with and without PCS. A history of PCS was present in 100 of 617 patients. Patients with PCS were more likely to be males (P=0.02), older (P=0.014), and to have a history of previous aortic dissection (P<0.001) or aneurysms (P<0.001). In contrast, PCS patients were less likely to have presenting chest pain (P<0.001). Cardiac tamponade was less common in PCS patients (P=0.007). Fewer AAD patients with PCS underwent surgical repair (P=0.001). Hospital mortality was not adversely influenced by PCS (odds ratio [OR], 1.46; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81 to 2.63), but a trend for increased death was seen in patients with previous aortic valve replacement (AVR) (OR, 2.31; 95% CI, 0.98 to 5.43). Age 70 years or older, previous AVR, shock, and renal failure identified PCS patients at risk for death. CONCLUSIONS: Our study highlights differences in clinical characteristics, management, and outcomes of AAD patients with PCS. Importantly, PCS, with the exception of previous AVR, does not adversely influence early outcomes of AAD patients, including those undergoing surgical repair. However, because of otherwise dismal outcomes with medical management of AAD, our data indicate that a history of PCS (even that of previous AVR) should not preclude physicians from recommending surgical correction of type A aortic dissection in appropriate patients.

Gender-related differences in acute aortic dissection.

BACKGROUND: Few data exist on gender-related differences in clinical presentation, diagnostic findings, management, and outcomes in acute aortic dissection (AAD). METHODS AND RESULTS: Accordingly, we evaluated 1078 patients enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD) to assess differences in clinical features, management, and in-hospital outcomes between men and women. Of the patients enrolled in IRAD (32.1%) with AAD, 346 were women. Although less frequently affected by AAD (32.1% of AAD), women were significantly older and had more often presented later than men (P=0.008); symptoms of coma/altered mental status were more common, whereas pulse deficit was less common. Diagnostic imaging suggestive of rupture, ie, periaortic hematoma, and pleural or pericardial effusion were more commonly observed in women. In-hospital complications of hypotension and tamponade occurred with greater frequency in women, resulting in higher in-hospital mortality compared with men. After adjustment for age and hypertension, women with aortic dissection die more frequently than men (OR, 1.4, P=0.04), predominantly in the 66- to 75-year age group. Moreover, surgical outcome was worse in women than men (P=0.013); type A dissection in women was associated with a higher surgical mortality of 32% versus 22% in men despite similar delay, surgical technique, and hemodynamics. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis provides insights into gender-related differences in AAD with regard to clinical characteristics, management, and outcomes; important diagnostic and therapeutic implications may help shed light on aortic dissection in women to improve their outcomes.

Characterizing the young patient with aortic dissection: results from the International Registry of Aortic Dissection (IRAD).

OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to better characterize the young patient with aortic dissection (AoD). BACKGROUND: Aortic dissection is unusual in young patients, and frequently associated with unusual presentations. METHODS: Data were collected on 951 patients diagnosed with AoD between January 1996 and November 2001. Two categories of patients, <40 years and >or=40 years, were compared using chi-square cross tabulations for categorical and Student t test for continuous data. RESULTS: Sixty-eight patients (7%) with AoD were <40 years of age. Compared with patients >or=40 years, younger patients were less likely to have a prior history of hypertension (p < 0.05); however, younger patients were more likely to have Marfan syndrome, bicuspid aortic valve, and prior aortic surgery (all, p < 0.05). Clinical presentations in the two age groups were similar; however, younger patients were less likely to be hypertensive (25% vs. 45%, p = 0.003). The proximal aortas of young AoD patients were larger (all, p < 0.05) compared with older patients. These differences in aortic size between age groups were not entirely related to Marfan syndrome. Mortality among young patients was similar to patients >or=40 years of age (22% vs. 24%, p = NS), irrespective of the site of dissection. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with older patients with AoD, young patients have unique risk factors for dissection: Marfan syndrome, bicuspid aortic valves, and larger aortic dimensions. Surprisingly, the mortality risk for young AoD patients is not lower than older AoD patients.

Acute type A aortic dissection in the elderly: clinical characteristics, management, and outcomes in the current era.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to evaluate the clinical characteristics, management, and outcomes of elderly patients with acute type A aortic dissection. BACKGROUND: Few data exist on the clinical manifestations and outcomes of acute type A aortic dissection in an elderly patient cohort. METHODS: We categorized 550 patients with type A aortic dissection enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection into two age strata (<70 and >or=70 years) and compared their clinical features, management, and in-hospital events. RESULTS: Thirty-two percent of patients with type A dissection were aged >or=70 years. Marfan syndrome was exclusively associated with dissection in the young, whereas hypertension, atherosclerosis and iatrogenic dissection predominated in older patients. Typical symptoms (abrupt onset of chest or back pain) and signs (aortic regurgitation murmur or pulse deficits) of dissection were less common among the elderly. Fewer elderly patients were managed surgically than younger patients (64% vs. 86%, p < 0.0001). Hypotension occurred more frequently (46% vs. 32%, p = 0.002) and focal neurologic deficits less frequently (18% vs. 26%, p = 0.04) among the elderly. In-hospital mortality was higher among older patients (43% vs. 28%, p = 0.0006). Logistic regression analysis identified age >or=70 years as an independent predictor of hospital death for acute type A aortic dissection (odds ratio 1.7, 95% confidence interval 1.1-2.8; p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows significant differences between older (age >or=70 years) and younger (age <70 years) patients with acute type A aortic dissection in their clinical characteristics, management, and hospital outcomes. Future research should evaluate strategies to improve outcomes in this high-risk elderly cohort.