Is a severe preoperative condition a contraindication for aortic valve-sparing reimplantation in type A aortic dissection?

BACKGROUND: Type A aortic dissection (TAAD) surgical management is still under debate. The purpose of this study was to demonstrate the feasibility and safety of the aortic valve-sparing root reconstruction (AVSR) procedure in 92 consecutive patients operated for TAAD, even when preoperative condition was severe (malperfusion, shock or both). METHODS: Our hospital database was reviewed to identify all patients who underwent an AVSR procedure for TAAD over 14 years. From May 2000 to June 2014, 92 consecutive patients were studied regarding to their preoperative condition. RESULTS: Age (61±13 years) and logistic Euroscore (23.4±15.3%) as well as cross-clamping (113±39 min), cardiopulmonary bypass (142±49 min) and circulatory arrest (22±13 min) times were collected. Hospital mortality was 16.3%. Mean follow-up was complete for a mean period of 27.6 months. One patient had early reoperation for aortic insufficiency. Actuarial survival at 1 year was 82.5%. The analysis of each group showed comparable mortality and morbidity in between patients. CONCLUSIONS: Based upon our experience in the management of TAAD, a reimplantation procedure could be performed regardless preoperative malperfusion or shock, with an acceptable postoperative over mortality or morbidity. A word of caution should be brought to patients over 70 years old.

Does the Addition of a Gastroepiploic Artery to Bilateral Internal Thoracic Artery Improve Survival?

It is unclear whether the additional conduit to supplement bilateral internal thoracic arteries (BITA) influences the patient outcome in coronary surgery. This retrospective study compared long-term survival of patients undergoing left-sided BITA grafting in which the third conduit to the right coronary system (RCA) was either vein graft (SVG) or gastroepiploic artery (GEA). From 1989 to 2014, 1432 consecutive patients underwent left-sided revascularization with BITA associated with SVG (n = 599) or GEA (n = 833) to RCA. Propensity score was calculated by logistic regression model and patients were matched 1 to 1 leading to 2 groups of 320 matched patients. The primary end point was the overall mortality from any cause. GEA was used in significantly lower risk patients. The 30-day mortality was 1.6% without influence of the graft configuration. Postoperative follow-up was 13.6 ± 6.6 years and was 94% complete. The significant difference in patients' survival observed at 20 years in favor of GEA in unmatched groups (48 ± 4% vs 33 ± 6%, P < 0.001) was not confirmed in matched groups (41 ± 7% vs 36 ± 7%, P = 0.112). In multivariable Cox model analysis, the conduit used to RCA did not influence the long-term survival in matched groups, like no other graft configuration or operative parameter. Only complete revascularization remained predictor of survival (P = 0.016), with age (P < 0.0001), diabetes status (P = 0.007), and left ventricle ejection fraction (P < 0.0001). Long-term survival in patients undergoing BITA grafting is not affected by using GEA as third arterial conduit in alternative to SVG. Further studies are necessary to assess its impact on long-term cardiac events.

Chest wall infarction following bilateral internal thoracic harvesting for coronary revascularization in a patient with previous aortic abdominal aneurysm surgery: A rare complication.

A 75 years old man with previous aortic abdominal aneurysm surgery through a transverse laparotomy underwent bilateral internal thoracic artery to coronary artery bypass grafting. He immediately thereafter developed a severe chest and upper abdominal walls ischemia with metabolic acidosis, and finally deep sternum wound infection and upper abdominal wall necrosis. He benefitted from sternal reconstruction and vaccum assisted treatment, with delayed pectus major flap reconstruction. Chest and abdominal wall infarction following bilateral internal thoracic artery (BITA) harvesting is a very rare but life-threatening complication. Caution use of BIMA should be in order in patients with inferior epigastric artery flow impairment.

How decisive is the number of distal arterial anastomoses in coronary bypass surgery?

BACKGROUND: The benefit of arterial revascularization in coronary surgery remains controversial. The incremental value of additional grafts to the left internal thoracic artery (ITA) has been mainly assessed according to the number of arterial grafts, possibly limiting the detection of its actual impact. We analyzed the influence of the number of distal arterial anastomoses (DAA) performed on late mortality in patients having received from one to three arterial grafts. METHODS: Retrospective review of 3685 primary isolated coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) performed from 1989 to 2014 was conducted with a 13-year mean follow-up. One arterial graft (SITA) was used in 969 patients, two arterial grafts, ITA or gastroepiploic artery (GEA), in 1883 patients (BITA: 1644; SITA+GEA: 239), and three arterial grafts in 833 patients (BITA+GEA). Totally, 795 patients (22%) received one DAA, 1142 patients (31%) two, 1337 patients (36%) three, and 411 patients (11%) four or more. A sub-group analysis was done in the 2104 patients with 3-vessel disease who received at least 2 arterial grafts. RESULTS: In this series the early mortality was 1.6% and it was not influenced by the surgical technique. Late mortality was significantly influenced by age, gender, heart failure, LV ejection fraction, diabetes status, complete revascularization, number of arterial grafts, number of DAA, both ITA, sequential ITA graft, GEA graft. In multivariable analysis with Cox regression model, the number of DAA was the only technical significant independent prognosis factor of late survival (p < 0.0001), predominant over both ITA, complete revascularization and number of arterial grafts. The impact of the number of DAA on survival was found discriminant from 1 to 3; after 3 there was no more additional effect. In 3-vessel disease patients who received at least 2 arterial grafts, the number of DAA remained a significant independent prognosis factor of late survival (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The number of distal arterial anastomoses is an independent predictor of long-term survival, predominant over the number of arterial grafts and the completeness of the revascularization; higher the number, better the late survival. It is a strong support of the extensive use of arterial grafting in CABG.

Femoral Arterial Thrombosis in a Young Adult after Nonsevere COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: Few cases of arterial thromboembolisms have been reported after novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in case of severe infection or in elderly patients. We report a case of femoral arterial thrombosis in a young patient after nonsevere infection. CASE DESCRIPTION: A common femoral artery thrombosis extended in the first third of superficial and profunda femoral arteries associated with tibial posterior and popliteal artery thrombosis was diagnosed in a 24-year-old man complaining of right lower limb pain for one month. The evolution was good after anticoagulation and antiaggregant treatments and thrombectomy. Etiologic assessment was negative except for nonsevere COVID-19. DISCUSSION: COVID-19 accesses host cells via angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 protein, abundant in the lungs, which is also expressed by endothelial cells and is associated with important inflammatory syndrome and coagulopathy, leading to vascular lesions. Thrombosis prevalence is not fully established and seems to be higher in case of major inflammation and in the intensive care unit (ICU). Arterial thromboembolisms are described in many vascular territories, each time in elderly patients, or in case of severe infection. We described a femoral arterial thrombosis in a young patient with negative etiological assessment except nonsevere COVID-19. Treatment consists in anticoagulation and antiaggregant drugs and thrombectomy. Preventing venous thromboembolism treatment is recommended in case of severe infection or in the ICU, but there is no clear recommendation for arterial thromboembolism prevention. This case should lead us to be very careful of the arterial event risk even if the infection is nonsevere and the patient is young.

Transcarotid Approach for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement With the Sapien 3 Prosthesis: A Multicenter French Registry.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to describe the procedural and clinical outcomes of patients undergoing transcarotid (TC) transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with the Edwards Sapien 3 device. BACKGROUND: The TC approach for TAVR holds the potential to become the optimal alternative to the transfemoral gold standard. Limited data exist regarding safety and efficacy of TC-TAVR using the Edwards Sapien 3 device. METHODS: The French Transcarotid TAVR prospective multicenter registry included patients between 2014 and 2018. Consecutive patients treated in 1 of the 13 participating centers ineligible for transfemoral TAVR were screened for TC-TAVR. Clinical and echocardiographic data were prospectively collected. Perioperative and 30-day outcomes were reported according to the updated Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC-2). RESULTS: A total of 314 patients were included with a median (interquartile range) age of 83 (78 to 88) years, 63% were males, Society of Thoracic Surgeons mortality risk score 5.8% (4% to 8.3%). Most patients presented with peripheral artery disease (64%). TC-TAVR was performed under general anesthesia in 91% of cases, mostly using the left carotid artery (73.6%) with a procedural success of 97%. Three annulus ruptures were reported, all resulting in patient death. At 30 days, rates of major bleeding, new permanent pacemaker, and stroke or transient ischemic attack were 4.1%, 16%, and 1.6%, respectively. The 30-day mortality was 3.2%. CONCLUSIONS: TC-TAVR using the Edwards Sapien 3 device was safe and effective in this prospective multicenter registry. The TC approach might be considered, in selected patients, as the first-line alternative approach for TAVR whenever the transfemoral access is prohibited. Sapien 3 device was safe and effective in our multicenter cohort.

Outcomes after transaortic transcatheter aortic valve implantation: long-term findings from the European ROUTE†.

OBJECTIVES: There is lack of data regarding the longer-term outcomes of patients undergoing transaortic (TAo) transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). We aimed to provide a contemporary snapshot of the types and frequencies of events in the year following TAo-TAVI. METHODS: The Registry of the Utilization of the TAo-TAVI approach using the Edwards SAPIEN Valve (ROUTE) is a multicentre, European, prospective, observational registry of aortic stenosis patients undergoing TAo-TAVI. Patients were grouped according to the composite end point death, myocardial infarction, stroke/transient ischaemic attack, major vascular complications, life-threatening bleeding, acute kidney injury (AKI) and/or cardiovascular rehospitalization. RESULTS: Two hundred and fifty-three patients with a mean age of 81.5 ± 5.8 years were included, of whom 89 (35.2%) patients met the composite end point (the event group) and 164 (64.8%) patients did not (the event-free group). New York Heart Association (NYHA) class III/IV (85.2% vs 71.8%, P = 0.017), Canadian Cardiovascular Society angina class III/IV (22.6% vs 11.4%; P = 0.021), pulmonary disease (32.6% vs 18.9%; P = 0.015) and renal insufficiency (15.7% vs 3.0%; P < 0.001) were more common in the event group. At 1 year, the most common event was death (19.1%), followed by AKI stage II or III (14.7%). The baseline renal insufficiency was the strongest independent predictor of composite end point achievement [odds ratio (OR) 7.55, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.33-24.56], followed by NYHA class III/IV (OR 2.316, 95% CI 1.06-5.06) and pulmonary disease (OR 2.91, 95% CI 1.45-5.85). Pulmonary disease was also an independent predictor of 1-year mortality (OR 3.01, 95% CI 1.34-6.75). CONCLUSIONS: Long-term outcomes after TAo-TAVI appear to be similar to those for TAVI via other non-transfemoral access routes. Awareness of characteristics associated with poorer outcomes may aid patient selection and identification of those requiring closer post-procedural monitoring. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01991431.

Balloon-expandable transaortic transcatheter aortic valve implantation with or without predilation.

OBJECTIVE: It has been reported that balloon aortic valvuloplasty immediately before transfemoral or transapical transcatheter aortic valve implantation has mostly little to no clinical value. We aimed to provide data on the need for balloon aortic valvuloplasty in patients undergoing transaortic transcatheter aortic valve implantation. METHODS: Patients undergoing transaortic transcatheter aortic valve implantation with the Edwards SAPIEN XT (Nyon, Switzerland) or 3 transcatheter heart valve were prospectively included at 18 sites across Europe. In the present analysis, we compare the periprocedural and 30-day outcomes of patients undergoing conventional (+ balloon aortic valvuloplasty) versus direct (- balloon aortic valvuloplasty) transaortic transcatheter aortic valve implantation. RESULTS: Of the 300 patients enrolled, 222 underwent conventional and 78 underwent direct transaortic transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Peak and mean transvalvular gradients were improved in both groups with no significant difference between groups. Procedural duration, contrast agent volume, and requirement for postdilation were also comparable. A trend toward fewer periprocedural complications was evident in the direct group (3.9% vs 11.3%; P = .053), with significantly lower rates of permanent pacemaker implantation (0% vs 5.0%; P = .034). Balloon aortic valvuloplasty omission had no significant effect on any of the 30-day safety and efficacy outcomes, including Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 composite end points (early safety events: 22.7% vs 17.4%, odds ratio, 1.17, 95% confidence interval, 0.53-2.62; clinical efficacy events: 20.5% vs 18.7%, odds ratio, 1.14, 95% confidence interval, 0.51-2.55). CONCLUSIONS: For many patients, balloon aortic valvuloplasty predilation seems to have little clinical value in transaortic transcatheter aortic valve implantation using a balloon expandable transcatheter valve and may result in a higher rate of periprocedural complications, particularly in terms of permanent pacemaker implantation.

Transaortic transcatheter aortic valve implantation using SAPIEN XT or SAPIEN 3 valves in the ROUTE registry.

OBJECTIVES: Transaortic (TAo) access for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is an alternative to the conventional transfemoral or transapical routes. Data comparing the characteristics and outcomes of TAo-TAVI using the SAPIEN XT and SAPIEN 3 heart valves are scarce. The objective of the current analysis was to provide such information. METHODS: ROUTE is an international, prospective, observational registry. Patients with severe calcific aortic stenosis scheduled for TAo-TAVI with an Edwards SAPIEN XT or a SAPIEN 3 heart valve were consecutively enrolled at 22 centres across Europe between February 2013 and February 2015. Periprocedural, in-hospital and 30-day complication rates were assessed. RESULTS: Of the 301 patients included, 126 (41.9%) received a SAPIEN 3 and 175 (58.1%) a SAPIEN XT. The SAPIEN 3 was associated with shorter procedure time (101 ± 35 vs 111 ± 40 min; P = 0.031) and a lower quantity of contrast agent used (87 ± 43 vs 112 ± 50 ml; P < 0.001). Balloon dilation was performed less often before (68.0% vs 78.3%; P = 0.045) and after implantation (13.6% vs 30.1%; P = 0.001). No statistically significant differences between the valve types were documented for overall (4.1% SAPIEN 3 vs 7.6% SAPIEN XT; P = 0.21), TAVI-related (0.8% vs 4.7%; P = 0.084) and cardiovascular mortality (2.4% vs 5.9%; P = 0.158). Major vascular complications were less frequent (0.8% vs 5.3%; P = 0.049), and there was a lower rate of moderate-to-severe paravalvular regurgitation (0.8% vs 5.1%; P = 0.050) in the SAPIEN 3 group. CONCLUSIONS: Both the SAPIEN XT and SAPIEN 3 were safely implanted via the TAo route, though the SAPIEN 3 may be associated with a higher procedural success rate and improved prognosis. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01991431.

Transaortic transcatheter aortic valve implantation as a first-line choice or as a last resort? An analysis based on the ROUTE registry.

OBJECTIVES: Transaortic transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAo-TAVI) is a recently developed alternative to transapical (TA) or transfemoral (TF) TAVI. We aimed to analyse the effectiveness and safety of TAo-TAVI as a first line approach and to compare it to patients receiving TAo-TAVI as a last resort, which is current practice. METHODS: ROUTE is a prospective, multicentre registry to assess the clinical outcomes of TAo-TAVI. Patients without contraindications for TA- and TF-TAVI (TAo-first) were compared to patients with contraindications for both of these access routes (TAo-last). Outcome analysis was based on VARC II defined clinical end-points. RESULTS: Three hundred and one patients were included, of which 224 patients met TAo-first and 77 TAo-last criteria. The valve was delivered and catheter retrieved successfully in all patients. In the TAo-first group, rates of conversion to open surgery and requirement for a second valve were low and not different compared to TAo-last patients (1% vs. 3%, P = 0.46 and 1% vs. 3%, P = 0.46, respectively). This was also true for the rate of paravalvular regurgitation (≥ moderate: 4% vs. 3%). All-cause mortality at 30-days was 6% vs. 5% ( P = 0.76), rates of stroke 2% vs. 0% ( P = 0.24), pacemaker implantation (11% vs. 4%, P = 0.093), and life-threatening bleeding 4% vs. 3% ( P = 0.70). Valve safety (both 85%, P = 0.98) and clinical efficacy (80% vs. 82%; P = 0.73) did not differ between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Although comparative data to TA and TF procedures were not available in the present analysis, findings suggest that TAo may be considered not only as a last resort strategy when classical access routes are deemed unfeasible, but also as a potential first-line option, with only low rates of paravalvular regurgitation and permanent pacemaker implantation. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV: NCT01991431.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Using Transaortic Access: Experience From the Multicenter, Multinational, Prospective ROUTE Registry.

OBJECTIVES: The Registry of the Utilization of the TAo-TAVR approach using the Edwards SAPIEN Valve (ROUTE) was established to assess the effectiveness and safety of the use of transaortic (TAo) access for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) procedures (NCT01991431). BACKGROUND: TAVR represents an alternative to surgical valve replacement in high-risk patients. Whereas the transfemoral access route is used commonly as the first-line approach, transapical access is an option for patients not suitable for transfemoral treatment mainly due to anatomic conditions. TAo-TAVR has been shown to be a viable alternative surgical access route; however, only limited data on its effectiveness and safety has been published. METHODS: ROUTE is a multicenter, international, prospective, observational registry; data were collected from 18 centers across Europe starting in February 2013. Patients having severe calcific aortic stenosis were documented if they were scheduled to undergo TAo-TAVR using an Edwards SAPIEN XT or a SAPIEN 3 valve. The primary endpoint was 30-day mortality. Secondary endpoints were intraprocedural or in hospital and 30-day complication rates. RESULTS: A total of 301 patients with a mean age of 81.7 ± 5.9 years and an Society of Thoracic Surgeons score of 9.0 ± 7.6% were included. Valve success was documented in 96.7%. The 30-day mortality was 6.1% (18/293) (procedure-related mortality: 3.1%; 9 of 293). The Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 defined complications included myocardial infarction (1.0%), stroke (1.0%), transient ischemic attack (0.3%), major vascular complications (3.4%), life-threatening bleeding (3.4%), and acute kidney injury (9.5%). In 3.3% of patients, paravalvular regurgitation was classified as moderate or severe (10 of 300). Twenty-six patients (8.8%) required permanent pacemaker implantation. CONCLUSIONS: TAo access for TAVR seems to be a safe alternative to the transapical procedure.

Association of transaortic approach and transoesophageal echocardiography as the primary imaging technique for improved results in transcatheter valve implantation.

OBJECTIVES: The transaortic access has been proposed to perform transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients with no other available access. We hypothesize that its coupling with transoesophageal echocardiographic guidance may further reduce procedure-related morbidity. METHODS: Transoesophageal echocardiography was adopted as the primary imaging modality to produce high-resolution images and to guide the deployment of the transcatheter valve. This imaging modality allows continuous visualization not only of the prosthesis and of the delivery system, but also of the surrounding anatomical landmarks (aortic annulus, sinotubular junction and anterior mitral leaflet). RESULTS: We report an initial series of eight patients, who were treated by a transaortic delivery of the transcatheter valve (SAPIEN Valve, Edwards Lifesciences Inc., Irvine, CA, USA) through an upper mini-sternotomy and guided by transoesophageal echocardiography. The procedure was uneventful in all patients; there were no cases of access site morbidity, periprocedural stroke or renal failure. CONCLUSIONS: The association of the transaortic route and the transoesophageal echo guidance has the potential to improve the results of transcatheter valve implantation, and deserves further investigation.

Aortic valve stenosis after previous coronary bypass: transcatheter valve implantation or aortic valve replacement?

We report a prospective comparison between transcatheter valve implantation (TAVI, n = 13) and surgical aortic valve replacement (AVR, n = 10) in patients with severe aortic valve stenosis and previous coronary bypass surgery (CABG). All patients had at least bilateral patent internal thoracic arteries bypass without indication of repeat revascularization. After a similar post-procedure outcome, despite one early death in TAVI group, the 1-year survival was 100% in surgical group and in transfemoral TAVI group, and 73% in transapical TAVI group. When previous CABG is the lone surgical risk factor, indications for a TAVI procedure have to be cautious, specially if transfemoral approach is not possible.

Is there an optimal minimally invasive technique for left anterior descending coronary artery bypass?

BACKGROUND: The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the clinical outcome of three different minimally invasive surgical techniques for left anterior descending (LAD) coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG): Port-Access surgery (PA-CABG), minimally invasive direct CABG (MIDCAB) and off-pump totally endoscopic CABG (TECAB). METHODS: Over a decade, 160 eligible patients for elective LAD bypass were referred to one of the three techniques: 48 PA-CABG, 53 MIDCAB and 59 TECAB. In MIDCAB group, Euroscore was higher and target vessel quality was worse. In TECAB group, early patency was systematically evaluated using coronary CT scan. During follow-up (mean 2.7 ± 0.1 years, cumulated 438 years) symptom-based angiography was performed. RESULTS: There was no conversion from off-pump to on-pump procedure or to sternotomy approach. In TECAB group, there was one hospital cardiac death (1.7%), reoperation for bleeding was higher (8.5% vs 3.7% in MIDCAB and 2% in PA-CABG) and 3-month LAD reintervention was significantly higher (10% vs 1.8% in MIDCAB and 0% in PA-CABG). There was no difference between MIDCAB and PA-CABG groups. During follow-up, symptom-based angiography (n = 12) demonstrated a good patency of LAD bypass in all groups and 4 patients underwent a no LAD reintervention. At 3 years, there was no difference in survival; 3-year angina-free survival and reintervention-free survival were significantly lower in TECAB group (TECAB, 85 ± 12%, 88 ± 8%; MIDCAB, 100%, 98 ± 5%; PA-CABG, 94 ± 8%, 100%; respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Our study confirmed that minimally invasive LAD grafting was safe and effective. TECAB is associated with a higher rate of early bypass failure and reintervention. MIDCAB is still the most reliable surgical technique for isolated LAD grafting and the least cost effective.