One-stage hybrid coronary revascularization for the treatment of multivessel coronary artery disease- Periprocedural and long-term results from the "HYBRID-COR" feasibility study.

Background: The constant growth of interest in hybrid coronary artery revascularization (HCR) is apparent. Yet, few studies report outcomes of the one-stage HCR. Consequently, the status of such procedures is not adequately supported in clinical guidelines. The aim of this study was to report the safety, feasibility, and long term-outcomes of the one-stage HCR. Methods and results: Patients were enrolled in the prospective one-stage hybrid coronary revascularization program (HYBRID-COR). They underwent a one-stage hybrid revascularization procedure while on double antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with Ticagrelor: endoscopic atraumatic coronary artery bypass grafting (EACAB) for revascularization of the left anterior descending (LAD) artery and percutaneous intervention in non-LAD arteries with contemporary drug-eluting stents. The composite primary endpoint included MACCE (major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events: death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and repeated revascularization) in long-term observation. The study cohort consisted of 30 patients (68% male) with stable coronary artery disease (26.7%) and unstable angina (73.3%). Procedural success was 100%. No death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke were observed in the perioperative period. One patient (3.3%) required chest revision and blood transfusion due to surgical bleeding. Kidney injury was noted in two patients (6.6%). In a long-term follow-up (median; IQR: 4.25; 2.62-4.69 years), two patients (6.6%) underwent repeated revascularization and one patient (3.3%) died due to MI. The overall primary endpoint rate was 9.9%. Conclusion: One-stage hybrid revascularization, on DAPT, is a feasible, safe, and efficient way of achieving complete revascularization in selected patients. The complication rate is low and acceptable. Further randomized trials are required.

Transcatheter aortic valve­in­valve implantation for failed surgical bioprostheses: results from the Polish Transcatheter Aortic Valve-in-Valve Implantation (ViV­TAVI) Registry

INTRODUCTION: Transcatheter aortic valve­in ­valve implantation (ViV­TAVI) has emerged as an alternative to redo surgery in patients with failed surgical aortic bioprosthesis. OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the safety and efficacy of ViV­TAVI in Polish patients after surgical aortic valve replacement. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a nationwide multicenter registry of ViV­TAVI procedures. Data were collected using an online form, and the clinical follow ­up lasted 1 year. RESULTS: From 2008 to 2020, 130 ViV­TAVI procedures were performed (1.9% of all transcatheter aortic valve implantation [TAVI] cases). A considerable increase in ViV­TAVI procedures since 2018 has been observed (n = 59, 45% of ViV­TAVI cases). Hancock II, Freestyle, and homograft were the most frequently treated bioprostheses. The self ­expanding supra ­annular Corevalve / Evolut valve was used in 76% of cases. In 21% of cases, the mean postprocedural pressure gradient (PG) exceeded 20 mm Hg. All­cause mortal­ity at 1 year was 10.8%. Aortic valve stenosis was associated with a higher mean PG than aortic valve regurgitation or mixed disease (P = 0.004). Supra ­annular transcatheter aortic valves were associated with lower mean PGs than intra ­annular valves (P = 0.004). Second ­generation devices were associated with shorter procedure time (120 min vs 135 min, P = 0.04), less frequent need for additional TAVI (2% vs 10%, P = 0.04), and lower 1­year cardiovascular mortality (95% vs 82.8%, P = 0.03) than first­generation valves. CONCLUSIONS: Transcatheter treatment of failed bioprostheses is increasingly common, with the best hemodynamic effect shown for supra ­annular valves. The introduction of second­generation valves has improved procedural and clinical outcomes.

Long­term outcomes of transcatheter self-expanding aortic valve implantations in inoperable and high surgical-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis: a single-center single-valve registry.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is being increasingly used in patients with longer life expectancy. Data on long­term outcomes are still limited. AIMS: The aim of the study was to assess the clinical outcomes of patients treated with TAVI and identify baseline and procedure­related factors influencing long­term survival. METHODS: Symptomatic patients with critical aortic stenosis who were inoperable or had high surgical risk were qualified for TAVI. Between August 2012 and December 2017, 248 consecutive patients treated with self ­expanding Medtronic valve implantation at American Heart of Poland in Bielsko­Biala were prospectively enrolled. Patients were followed for 30 days after the procedure and subsequently annually. All events were classified according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium­2 (VARC­2) criteria and assessed. Survival was compared between the subgroups defined by the EuroSCORE II (European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation II) and with matched representatives from the general population. RESULTS: The median (interquartile range) follow­up was 3.4 (2.5-4.6) years, and the longest follow­up lasted 7.8 years. A total of 92 patients (37.1%) died during the follow­up. The Kaplan-Meier estimates for cumulative mortality at 1, 3, 5, and 7 years were: 11.3%, 26.8%, 42.1%, and 60.6%. Patients with EuroSCORE II greater than 6% experienced worse survival compared with those with EuroSCORE II 6% or less (P = 0.008). Patients with EuroSCORE II 6% or less had similar survival to the general population. Male sex, baseline eGFR of less than 50 ml/min/1.73 m2, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, moderate / severe paravalvular leak, absence of postdilatation, major vascular complication, and stroke at 30 days were independently associated with long­term mortality. CONCLUSIONS: TAVI with a self­expanding Medtronic valve implantation according to a consistent protocol was associated with favorable outcomes. Patients with lower EuroSCORE II scores had the same prognosis as the actuarial survival of the general population.

Transcatheter aortic valve-in-valve implantation in failed stentless bioprostheses.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the safety and efficacy of transcathether aortic valve-in-valve implantation (ViV-TAVI) in degenerated stentless bioprostheses with failed stented valves and degenerated native aortic valves. INTRODUCTION: Little is known about ViV-TAVI in degenerated stentless valves. METHODS: Out of 45 ViV-TAVI procedures reported in the POL-TAVI registry, 20 failed stentless valves were compared with 25 stented prostheses and propensity-matched with 45 native TAVI cases. The mean follow-up was 633 (95% confidence interval [CI], 471-795) days and Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 (VARC-2) definitions were applied. RESULTS: Patients with degenerated stentless valves were younger (65.6, CI 58-73.1 years vs 75.6, CI 72.2-78 [stented] vs 80.1, CI 78.7-81.6 y. [native], P < 0.001). Implantation was required later after surgery (11.5, CI 8-14.9 years) in the stentless cohort as compared with the stented one (6.2, CI 4.7-7.6 years, P = 0.006). ViV-TAVI in the stentless group was also associated with larger amount of contrast (211, CI 157-266 mL vs 135, CI 104-167 mL [stented] vs 132 (119-145) mL [native], P = 0.022). Using VARC-2 composite endpoints, ViV-TAVI in stentless prostheses was characterized by a lower device success (50% vs 76% in stented vs 88.9% in native TAVI, P < 0.001), but comparable early safety up to 30 days (73.7% vs 84% vs 81.8%, respectively, log-rank P = 0.667) and long-term clinical efficacy beyond 30 days (72.2% vs 72% vs 73.8%, respectively, log-rank P = 0.963). CONCLUSIONS: Despite technical challenges and a lower device success, ViV-TAVI in stentless aortic bioprostheses achieves similar safety, efficacy, and functional improvement as in stented or degenerated native valves.

Renal Artery Stenting Associated With Improvement in Renal Function and Blood Pressure Control in Long-Term Follow-Up.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Clinical benefits of percutaneous treatment of renal artery stenosis (RAS) remain controversial. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of renal artery stenting on kidney function and blood pressure (BP) control in the log-term follow-up. Additionally angiographic follow up was performed in selected subgroup of patients. METHODS: The study was designed as international registry of 265 consecutive patients with RAS treated with renal artery stenting. The primary end-point of the study was the change in renal function and blood pressure at long-term follow-up as compared with baseline values. Evaluation of the renal function was based on estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) with the use of the modification of diet in renal disease (MDRD) formula. RESULTS: All patients had clinical follow-up at the median time of 23.8 (interquartile range: 3-90) months during ambulatory visits. At follow-up eGFR improved in 53,9% of patients. These patients had lower pre-procedural systolic BP, more severe lesion type at baseline and lower diameter stenosis in control angiography. At follow up visits, SBP improvement was observed in 77,4% of patients. The average number of anti-hypertensive medications before the procedure and at follow up did not change significantly (2,70±1,0 vs 2,49±0,9, p=0,1). Restenosis rate based on control angiography performed at median time of 15 months was 12%. CONCLUSION: The results of the study suggest that interventional treatment of RAS may preserve renal function and improve blood pressure control at long-term follow-up.

Percutaneous versus surgical revascularization for multivessel coronary artery disease: a single center 10 year follow-up of SOS trial patients.

OBJECTIVES: To compare 10 year outcomes including death, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), repeat revascularization (RR), and severity of angina (CCS) after randomization to stent supported percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or surgical revascularization (CABG) in a single center participating in the SOS trial. BACKGROUND: Randomized studies show increased RR following PCI, but otherwise similar results to CABG in selected mutlivessel disease patients with up to 5 year follow up. There is no 10 year data available. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The analysis involved 100 patients randomized into the SOS study in Poland. RESULTS: Patients were well matched for baseline demographic and angiographic characteristics. During 9.6 +/- 0.85 year observation, there was no significant difference between groups for survival, CCS, and LVEF. Increased RR occurred following PCI; 21 (42%) vs. 9 (18%), P < 0.05. As a consequence, the MACCE was also significantly higher following PCI; 36 (72%) vs. 28 (56%), P < 0.05. Excess RR predominantly occurred in the first year and diminished over time with numerically less RR following PCI from year 5 to 10; 2 (4%) vs. 7 (14%), P = ns. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that patients with multivessel coronary artery disease technically suitable for either stent supported PCI or CABG have very similar 10 year outcomes with respect to mortality, angina class, LVEF, and MACCE other than RR. Excess RR following PCI predominantly occurs in early years and is numerically lower following PCI in years 5-10. This underscores the need for longer-term follow up from randomized trials.