Transcatheter aortic valve replacement after chest radiation: A propensity-matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: Chest radiation therapy (CRT) for malignant thoracic neoplasms is associated with development of valvular heart disease years later. As previous radiation exposure can complicate surgical treatment, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has emerged as an alternative. However, outcomes data are lacking for TAVR patients with a history of CRT. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of all patients who underwent a TAVR procedure at a single institution between September 2012 and November 2018. Among 1341 total patients, 50 had previous CRT. These were propensity-matched in a 1:2 ratio to 100 patients without history of CRT. Thirty-day adverse events were analyzed with generalized estimating equation models. Overall mortality was analyzed with stratified Cox regression modelling. RESULTS: Median clinical follow-up was 24 months (interquartile range [IQR], 12-44 months). There was no difference between CRT and non-CRT patients in overall mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 0.84 [0.37-1.90], P = 0.67), 30-day mortality (HR 3.1 [0.49-20.03], P = 0.23), or 30-day readmission rate (HR 1.0 [0.43-2.31], P = 1). There were no differences in the rates of most adverse events, but patients with CRT history had higher rates of postprocedural respiratory failure (HR 3.63 [1.32-10.02], P = 0.01) and permanent pacemaker implantation (HR 2.84 [1.15-7.01], P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: For patients with aortic valve stenosis and previous CRT, TAVR is safe and effective, with outcomes similar to those in the general aortic stenosis population. Patients with history of CRT are more likely to have postprocedural respiratory failure and to require permanent pacemaker implantation.

Comparative Efficacy of Nebivolol and Metoprolol to Prevent Tachycardia-Induced Cardiomyopathy in a Porcine Model.

Chronic tachycardia is a well-known cause of nonischemic cardiomyopathy. We hypothesized that nebivolol, a ß-blocker with nitric oxide activity, would be superior to a pure ß-blocker in preventing tachycardia-induced cardiomyopathy in a porcine model. Fifteen healthy Yucatan pigs were randomly assigned to receive nebivolol, metoprolol, or placebo once a day. All pigs underwent dual-chamber pacemaker implantation. The medication was started the day after the pacemaker implantation. On day 7 after implantation, each pacemaker was set at atrioventricular pace (rate, 170 beats/min), and the pigs were observed for another 7 weeks. Transthoracic echocardiograms, serum catecholamine levels, and blood chemistry data were obtained at baseline and at the end of the study. At the end of week 8, the pigs were euthanized, and complete histopathologic studies were performed. All the pigs developed left ventricular cardiomyopathy but remained hemodynamically stable and survived to the end of the study. The mean left ventricular ejection fraction decreased from baseline by 34%, 20%, and 20% in the nebivolol, metoprolol, and placebo groups, respectively. These changes did not differ significantly among the 3 groups (P =0.51). Histopathologic analysis revealed mild left ventricular perivascular fibrosis with cardiomyocyte hypertrophy in 14 of the 15 pigs. Both nebivolol and metoprolol failed to prevent cardiomyopathy in our animal model of persistent tachycardia and a high catecholamine state.

Overview of quality in cardiovascular imaging and procedures for clinicians: focus on appropriate-use-criteria guidelines.

Cardiovascular imaging and procedures have experienced exponential growth over the past 20 years in terms of new modalities, procedure volume, technological sophistication, and cost. As a result, related quality improvement tools have become multifaceted works in progress. This article briefly summarizes the evolution of the time-honored American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association clinical practice guidelines versus the newer American College of Cardiology Foundation appropriate-use-criteria guidelines and how these may interact with emerging performance measures, clinical data registries, and cardiovascular laboratory accreditation initiatives.

ACCF/AHA/ASE/ASNC/HFSA/HRS/SCAI/SCCT/SCMR/STS 2013 multimodality appropriate use criteria for the detection and risk assessment of stable ischemic heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, American Heart Association, American Society of Echocardiography, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Heart Failure Society of America, Heart Rhythm Society, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons.

The American College of Cardiology Foundation along with key specialty and subspecialty societies, conducted an appropriate use review of common clinical presentations for stable ischemic heart disease (SIHD) to consider use of stress testing and anatomic diagnostic procedures. This document reflects an updating of the prior Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC) published for radionuclide imaging (RNI), stress echocardiography (Echo), calcium scoring, coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA), stress cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR), and invasive coronary angiography for SIHD. This is in keeping with the commitment to revise and refine the AUC on a frequent basis. A major innovation in this document is the rating of tests side by side for the same indication. The side-by-side rating removes any concerns about differences in indication or interpretation stemming from prior use of separate documents for each test. However, the ratings were explicitly not competitive rankings due to the limited availability of comparative evidence, patient variability, and range of capabilities available in any given local setting. The indications for this review are limited to the detection and risk assessment of SIHD and were drawn from common applications or anticipated uses, as well as from current clinical practice guidelines. Eighty clinical scenarios were developed by a writing committee and scored by a separate rating panel on a scale of 1 to 9, to designate Appropriate, May Be Appropriate, or Rarely Appropriate use following a modified Delphi process following the recently updated AUC development methodology. The use of some modalities of testing in the initial evaluation of patients with symptoms representing ischemic equivalents, newly diagnosed heart failure, arrhythmias, and syncope was generally found to be Appropriate or May Be Appropriate, except in cases where low pre-test probability or low risk limited the benefit of most testing except exercise electrocardiogram (ECG). Testing for the evaluation of new or worsening symptoms following a prior test or procedure was found to be Appropriate. In addition, testing was found to be Appropriate or May Be Appropriate for patients within 90 days of an abnormal or uncertain prior result. Pre-operative testing was rated Appropriate or May Be Appropriate only for patients who had poor functional capacity and were undergoing vascular or intermediate risk surgery with 1 or more clinical risk factors or an organ transplant. The exercise ECG was suggested as an Appropriate test for cardiac rehabilitation clearance or for exercise prescription purposes. Testing in asymptomatic patients was generally found to be Rarely Appropriate, except for calcium scoring and exercise testing in intermediate and high-risk individuals and either stress or anatomic imaging in higher-risk individuals, which were all rated as May Be Appropriate. All modalities of follow-up testing after a prior test or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) within 2 years and within 5 years after coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) in the absence of new symptoms were rated Rarely Appropriate. Pre-operative testing for patients with good functional capacity, prior normal testing within 1 year, or prior to low-risk surgery also were found to be Rarely Appropriate. Imaging for an exercise prescription or prior to the initiation of cardiac rehabilitation was Rarely Appropriate except for cardiac rehabilitation clearance for heart failure patients.

ACCF/AHA/ASE/ASNC/HFSA/HRS/SCAI/SCCT/SCMR/STS 2013 multimodality appropriate use criteria for the detection and risk assessment of stable ischemic heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, American Heart Association, American Society of Echocardiography, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Heart Failure Society of America, Heart Rhythm Society, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons.

The American College of Cardiology Foundation along with key specialty and subspecialty societies, conducted an appropriate use review of common clinical presentations for stable ischemic heart disease (SIHD) to consider use of stress testing and anatomic diagnostic procedures. This document reflects an updating of the prior Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC) published for radionuclide imaging (RNI), stress echocardiography (Echo), calcium scoring, coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA), stress cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR), and invasive coronary angiography for SIHD. This is in keeping with the commitment to revise and refine the AUC on a frequent basis. A major innovation in this document is the rating of tests side by side for the same indication. The side-by-side rating removes any concerns about differences in indication or interpretation stemming from prior use of separate documents for each test. However, the ratings were explicitly not competitive rankings due to the limited availability of comparative evidence, patient variability, and range of capabilities available in any given local setting. The indications for this review are limited to the detection and risk assessment of SIHD and were drawn from common applications or anticipated uses, as well as from current clinical practice guidelines. Eighty clinical scenarios were developed by a writing committee and scored by a separate rating panel on a scale of 1-9, to designate Appropriate, May Be Appropriate, or Rarely Appropriate use following a modified Delphi process following the recently updated AUC development methodology. The use of some modalities of testing in the initial evaluation of patients with symptoms representing ischemic equivalents, newly diagnosed heart failure, arrhythmias, and syncope was generally found to be Appropriate or May Be Appropriate, except in cases where low pre-test probability or low risk limited the benefit of most testing except exercise electrocardiogram (ECG). Testing for the evaluation of new or worsening symptoms following a prior test or procedure was found to be Appropriate. In addition, testing was found to be Appropriate or May Be Appropriate for patients within 90 days of an abnormal or uncertain prior result. Pre-operative testing was rated Appropriate or May Be Appropriate only for patients who had poor functional capacity and were undergoing vascular or intermediate risk surgery with 1 or more clinical risk factors or an organ transplant. The exercise ECG was suggested as an Appropriate test for cardiac rehabilitation clearance or for exercise prescription purposes. Testing in asymptomatic patients was generally found to be Rarely Appropriate, except for calcium scoring and exercise testing in intermediate and high-risk individuals and either stress or anatomic imaging in higher-risk individuals, which were all rated as May Be Appropriate. All modalities of follow-up testing after a prior test or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) within 2 years and within 5 years after coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) in the absence of new symptoms were rated Rarely Appropriate. Pre-operative testing for patients with good functional capacity, prior normal testing within 1 year, or prior to low-risk surgery also were found to be Rarely Appropriate. Imaging for an exercise prescription or prior to the initiation of cardiac rehabilitation was Rarely Appropriate except for cardiac rehabilitation clearance for heart failure patients.

Aortic valve regurgitation that resolved after a ruptured coronary sinus aneurysm was patched.

Sinus of Valsalva aneurysms appear to be rare. They occur most frequently in the right sinus of Valsalva (52%) and the noncoronary sinus (33%). More of these aneurysms originate from the right coronary cusp than from the noncoronary cusp. Surgical intervention is usually recommended when symptoms become evident. We report the case of a 34-year-old woman who presented with a congenital, ruptured sinus of Valsalva aneurysm that originated from the noncoronary cusp. Moderate aortic regurgitation was associated with this lesion. Simple, direct patch closure of the ruptured aneurysm resolved the patient's left-to-right shunt and was associated with decreased aortic regurgitation to a degree that valve replacement was not necessary. Only trace residual aortic regurgitation was evident after 3 months, and the patient remained free of symptoms after 6 months. Our observations support the idea that substantial runoff blood flow in the immediate supra-annular region can be responsible for aortic regurgitation in the absence of a notable structural defect in the aortic valve, and that restoring physiologic flow in this region and equalizing aortic-cusp closure pressure can largely or completely resolve aortic insufficiency. Accordingly, valve replacement may not be necessary in all cases of ruptured sinus of Valsalva aneurysms with associated aortic valve regurgitation.