Patient selection for LIVE therapy: From clinical indications to multimodality imaging individual case planning.

BACKGROUND: Less Invasive Ventricular Enhancement (LIVE) with Revivent TC is an innovative therapy for symptomatic ischemic heart failure (HF). It is designed to reconstruct a negatively remodeled left ventricle (LV) after an anterior myocardial infarction (MI) by plication of the scar tissue. Its indications are specific, and as with any other structural heart intervention, the success of the procedure starts with appropriate patient selection. We aim to present the indications of the technique, crucial aspects in patient selection, and individual case planning approach. METHODS AND RESULTS: After clinical evaluation, transthoracic echocardiography is the first imaging modality to be performed in a potential candidate for the therapy. However, definitive indication and detailed case planning rely on late gadolinium-enhanced cardiac magnetic resonance imaging or multiphasic contrast-enhanced cardiac computed tomography. These imaging modalities also assist with relative or absolute contra-indications for the procedure. Individual assessment is done to tailor the procedure to the specifics of the LV anatomy and location of the myocardial scar. CONCLUSION: LIVE procedure is a unique intervention to treat symptomatic HF and ischemic cardiomyopathy after anterior MI. It is a highly customizable intervention that allows a patient-tailored approach, based on multimodality imaging assessment and planification.

Minimal access left ventricular reconstruction.

The Revivent TC™ Transcatheter Ventricular Enhancement System (BioVentrix Inc.) is intended for use in heart failure with cardiac dysfunction a previous myocardial infarction. The resultant increased left ventricular systolic volume and discrete, contiguous, noncontractile (akinetic and/or dyskinetic) scar located in the anteroseptal, apical (may extend laterally) region of the left ventricle (LV) lends itself to Revivent. The procedure, called Less Invasive Ventricular Enhancement, consists of the implantation of a series of microanchors pairs to exclude the scarred myocardium, to reduce and reshape the LV. We present the procedure step-by-step, as team coordination between the cardiac surgeon and the interventional cardiologist is essential to ensure good procedural outcomes. This is a novel and new technique to address heart failure secondary to myocardial infarction.

Mini-Stern Trial: A randomized trial comparing mini-sternotomy to full median sternotomy for aortic valve replacement.

OBJECTIVE: Aortic valve replacement (AVR) can be performed either through full median sternotomy (FS) or upper mini-sternotomy (MS). The Mini-Stern trial aimed to establish whether MS leads to quicker postoperative recovery and shorter hospital stay after first-time isolated AVR. METHODS: This pragmatic, open-label, parallel randomized controlled trial (RCT) compared MS with FS for first-time isolated AVR in 2 United Kingdom National Health Service hospitals. Primary endpoints were duration of postoperative hospital stay and the time to fitness for discharge from hospital after AVR, analyzed in the intent-to-treat population. RESULTS: In this RCT, 222 patients were recruited and randomized (n = 118 in the MS group; n = 104 in the FS group). Compared with the FS group, the MS group had a longer hospital length of stay (mean, 9.5 days vs 8.6 days) and took longer to achieve fitness for discharge home (mean, 8.5 days vs 7.5 days). Adjusting for valve type, sex, and surgeon, hazard ratios (HRs) from Cox models did not show a statistically significant effect of MS (relative to FS) on either hospital stay (HR, 0.874; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.668-1.143; P = .3246) or time to fitness for discharge (HR, 0.907; 95% CI, 0.688-1.197; P value = .4914). During a mean follow-up of 760 days (745 days for the MS group and 777 days for the FS group), 12 patients (10%) in the MS group and 7 patients (7%) in the FS group died (HR, 1.871; 95% CI, 0.723-4.844; P = .1966). Average extra cost for MS was £1714 during the first 12 months after AVR. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with FS for AVR, MS did not result in shorter hospital stay, faster recovery, or improved survival and was not cost-effective. The MS approach is not superior to FS for performing AVR.

Aortic Valve Replacement with a Conventional Stented Bioprosthesis versus Sutureless Bioprosthesis: a Study of 763 Patients.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this retrospective study was to compare early postoperative outcomes after aortic valve replacement (AVR) with sutureless bioprostheses and conventional stented bioprostheses implanted through median sternotomy. METHODS: From January 2011 to December 2016, 763 patients underwent aortic valve replacement with bioprostheses; of these, 139 received a Perceval S sutureless valve (Group A) and 624 received a Perimount Magna Ease valve (Group B). These groups were further divided into A1 (isolated Perceval AVR), A2 (Perceval AVR with coronary artery bypass grafting [CABG]), B1 (isolated conventional stented bioprosthesis), and B2 (conventional stented bioprosthesis + CABG). RESULTS: Patients in Group A were older (mean 74 years vs. 71 years; P<0.0001), predominantly women (53% vs. 32%; P<0.0001), had a higher logistic EuroSCORE (3.26 vs. 2.43; P<0.001), more preoperative atrial fibrillation (20% vs. 13%; P=0.03), and had a lower reopening rate for bleeding (2.1% vs. 6.7%; P=0.04). Compared to Group B1, Group A1 had shorter cross-clamp (mean 40 min vs. 57 min; P≤0.0001) and bypass times (mean 63 min vs. mean 80 min; P=0.02), and they bled less postoperatively (mean 295 ml vs. mean 393 ml; P=0.002). The mean gradient across Perceval valve was 12.5 mmHg while its effective orifice area was 1.5 cm2. CONCLUSION: In our retrospective study of 763 patients, sutureless valve group patients are older, mostly women, more symptomatic preoperatively, and have higher logistic EuroSCORE. They have shorter cross-clamp and bypass times, less postoperative bleeding, and reduced incidence of reopening. Further studies are needed to evaluate the clinical benefits in short, mid, and long-terms.

Thrombocytopenia After Aortic Valve Replacement: Comparison Between Sutureless Perceval S Valve and Perimount Magna Ease Bioprosthesis.

INTRODUCTION: The incidence of postoperative thrombocytopenia after aortic valve replacement (AVR) with the Perceval S Sutureless bioprosthesis remains unclear. The aim of this study was to report thrombocytopenia associated with the use of sutureless AVR. METHODS: The data was collected retrospectively for patients who had isolated AVR with sutureless Perceval S valve (Group A: 72 patients) and was compared with patients who underwent isolated sutured AVR with Perimount Magna Ease Bioprosthesis (Group B: 101 patients) in our institution between June 2014 and January 2017. RESULTS: Cardiopulmonary bypass and cross-clamp time were significantly shorter in group A. Maximum drop in platelet count was 58% mean (day 2.3) in group A versus 44% mean (day 1.7) in group B (P=0.0001). Absolute platelet count on postoperative day 1-6 in group A was significantly less than in group B (P≤0.05). Platelet count recovered to preoperative value in 44% patients in group B versus only in 26% patients in group A at discharge (P=0.018). Moderate thrombocytopenia occurs more often in group A (41% vs. 26%) (P=0.008) while severe thrombocytopenia (<50 x 109) was observed in 6% in group A but never in group B. Platelets (P=0.007) and packed red blood cells (P=0.009) transfusion was significantly higher in the group A. CONCLUSION: The implantation of sutureless Perceval aortic valves was associated with a significant drop in platelet count postoperatively with slow recovery and higher platelets and packed red blood cells transfusion requirements. A prospective randomised trial is needed to confirm our findings.

Early Clinical Results of Perceval Sutureless Aortic Valve in 139 Patients: Freeman Experience.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this retrospective study is to evaluate the safety and performance of the Perceval sutureless valve in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement. We report the 30-day clinical outcomes of 139 patients. METHODS: From January 2014 to December 2016, 139 patients underwent sutureless aortic valve replacement. Their operation notes, National Adult Cardiac Surgery Database and perioperative transoesophageal echocardiography findings were studied retrospectively. RESULTS: Ninety-two patients underwent isolated aortic valve replacement (group A) with Perceval valve and 47 patients had combined procedures of aortic valve replacement and coronary artery bypass grafting (group B). The patients received a size S (n=23), M (n=39), L (n=42) or XL (n=35) prosthesis. Perceval valve was successfully implanted in 135 (97.1%) patients. Mean cross-clamping time and bypass time were 40 and 63 minutes for isolated cases, while 68 and 107 minutes for combined cases. Three (2.1%) patients died within 30 days. Four patients suffered stroke and 5 patients went into acute renal failure. Median intensive care unit and hospital stay was 2 and 8.5, respectively. Four valves were explanted due to significant paravalvular leak after surgery. Five patients had permanent pacemaker as a result of complete heart block and mean postoperative drainage was 295 mL for isolated case and 457 mL for combined cases. The mean gradient across Perceval valve was 12.5 mmHg while its effective orifice area was 1.5 cm2. CONCLUSION: Early postoperative results showed that Perceval valve is safe. Further follow up is needed to evaluate the long-term outcome with this bioprosthesis.

Thrombocytopenia after aortic valve replacement: comparison between sutureless perceval s valve and perimount magna ease bioprosthesis

Abstract Introduction: The incidence of postoperative thrombocytopenia after aortic valve replacement (AVR) with the Perceval S Sutureless bioprosthesis remains unclear. The aim of this study was to report thrombocytopenia associated with the use of sutureless AVR. Methods: The data was collected retrospectively for patients who had isolated AVR with sutureless Perceval S valve (Group A: 72 patients) and was compared with patients who underwent isolated sutured AVR with Perimount Magna Ease Bioprosthesis (Group B: 101 patients) in our institution between June 2014 and January 2017. Results: Cardiopulmonary bypass and cross-clamp time were significantly shorter in group A. Maximum drop in platelet count was 58% mean (day 2.3) in group A versus 44% mean (day 1.7) in group B (P=0.0001). Absolute platelet count on postoperative day 1-6 in group A was significantly less than in group B (P≤0.05). Platelet count recovered to preoperative value in 44% patients in group B versus only in 26% patients in group A at discharge (P=0.018). Moderate thrombocytopenia occurs more often in group A (41% vs. 26%) (P=0.008) while severe thrombocytopenia (<50 x 109) was observed in 6% in group A but never in group B. Platelets (P=0.007) and packed red blood cells (P=0.009) transfusion was significantly higher in the group A. Conclusion: The implantation of sutureless Perceval aortic valves was associated with a significant drop in platelet count postoperatively with slow recovery and higher platelets and packed red blood cells transfusion requirements. A prospective randomised trial is needed to confirm our findings.

Aortic valve replacement with a conventional stented bioprosthesis versus sutureless bioprosthesis: a study of 763 patients

Abstract Objective: The aim of this retrospective study was to compare early postoperative outcomes after aortic valve replacement (AVR) with sutureless bioprostheses and conventional stented bioprostheses implanted through median sternotomy. Methods: From January 2011 to December 2016, 763 patients underwent aortic valve replacement with bioprostheses; of these, 139 received a Perceval S sutureless valve (Group A) and 624 received a Perimount Magna Ease valve (Group B). These groups were further divided into A1 (isolated Perceval AVR), A2 (Perceval AVR with coronary artery bypass grafting [CABG]), B1 (isolated conventional stented bioprosthesis), and B2 (conventional stented bioprosthesis + CABG). Results: Patients in Group A were older (mean 74 years vs. 71 years; P<0.0001), predominantly women (53% vs. 32%; P<0.0001), had a higher logistic EuroSCORE (3.26 vs. 2.43; P<0.001), more preoperative atrial fibrillation (20% vs. 13%; P=0.03), and had a lower reopening rate for bleeding (2.1% vs. 6.7%; P=0.04). Compared to Group B1, Group A1 had shorter cross-clamp (mean 40 min vs. 57 min; P≤0.0001) and bypass times (mean 63 min vs. mean 80 min; P=0.02), and they bled less postoperatively (mean 295 ml vs. mean 393 ml; P=0.002). The mean gradient across Perceval valve was 12.5 mmHg while its effective orifice area was 1.5 cm2. Conclusion: In our retrospective study of 763 patients, sutureless valve group patients are older, mostly women, more symptomatic preoperatively, and have higher logistic EuroSCORE. They have shorter cross-clamp and bypass times, less postoperative bleeding, and reduced incidence of reopening. Further studies are needed to evaluate the clinical benefits in short, mid, and long-terms.

Early clinical results of perceval sutureless aortic valve in 139 patients: freeman experience

Abstract Objective: The aim of this retrospective study is to evaluate the safety and performance of the Perceval sutureless valve in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement. We report the 30-day clinical outcomes of 139 patients. Methods: From January 2014 to December 2016, 139 patients underwent sutureless aortic valve replacement. Their operation notes, National Adult Cardiac Surgery Database and perioperative transoesophageal echocardiography findings were studied retrospectively. Results: Ninety-two patients underwent isolated aortic valve replacement (group A) with Perceval valve and 47 patients had combined procedures of aortic valve replacement and coronary artery bypass grafting (group B). The patients received a size S (n=23), M (n=39), L (n=42) or XL (n=35) prosthesis. Perceval valve was successfully implanted in 135 (97.1%) patients. Mean cross-clamping time and bypass time were 40 and 63 minutes for isolated cases, while 68 and 107 minutes for combined cases. Three (2.1%) patients died within 30 days. Four patients suffered stroke and 5 patients went into acute renal failure. Median intensive care unit and hospital stay was 2 and 8.5, respectively. Four valves were explanted due to significant paravalvular leak after surgery. Five patients had permanent pacemaker as a result of complete heart block and mean postoperative drainage was 295 mL for isolated case and 457 mL for combined cases. The mean gradient across Perceval valve was 12.5 mmHg while its effective orifice area was 1.5 cm2. Conclusion: Early postoperative results showed that Perceval valve is safe. Further follow up is needed to evaluate the long-term outcome with this bioprosthesis.

Minimally Invasive Versus Conventional Aortic Valve Replacement: A Propensity-Matched Study From the UK National Data.

OBJECTIVE: Minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (MIAVR) has been demonstrated as a safe and effective option but remains underused. We aimed to evaluate outcomes of isolated MIAVR compared with conventional aortic valve replacement (CAVR). METHODS: Data from The National Institute for Cardiovascular Outcomes Research (NICOR) were analyzed at seven volunteer centers (2006-2012). Primary outcomes were in-hospital mortality and midterm survival. Secondary outcomes were postoperative length of stay as well as cumulative bypass and cross-clamp times. Propensity modeling with matched cohort analysis was used. RESULTS: Of 307 consecutive MIAVR patients, 151 (49%) were performed during the last 2 years of study with a continued increase in numbers. The 307 MIAVR patients were matched on a 1:1 ratio. In the matched CAVR group, there was no statistically significant difference in in-hospital mortality [MIAVR, 4/307,(1.3%); 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.4%-3.4% vs CAVR, 6/307 (2.0%); 95% CI, 0.8%-4.3%; P = 0.752]. One-year survival rates in the MIAVR and CAVR groups were 94.4% and 94.6%, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in midterm survival (P = 0.677; hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.56-1.46). Median postoperative length of stay was lower in the MIAVR patients by 1 day (P = 0.009). The mean cumulative bypass time (94.8 vs 91.3 minutes; P = 0.333) and cross-clamp time (74.6 vs 68.4 minutes; P = 0.006) were longer in the MIAVR group; however, this was significant only in the cross-clamp time comparison. CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive aortic valve replacement is a safe alternative to CAVR with respect to operative and 1-year mortality and is associated with a shorter postoperative stay. Further studies are required in high-risk (logistic EuroSCORE > 10) patients to define the role of MIAVR.

Acute Lung Injury After Bilateral Lung Transplantation Due to Contralateral Pulmonary Arterial Anastomotic Obstruction.

Acute lung injury after lung transplantation is usually due to reperfusion injury and can severely affect outcome. Unilateral lung injury is usually due to obstruction of the pulmonary venous/left atrial anastomosis. We present the successful treatment of a patient with unilateral acute lung injury unusually caused by contralateral pulmonary artery anastomotic obstruction. The detection and management of this clinical situation is discussed.

Hemodynamic, echocardiographic, and exercise-related effects of the HeartWare left ventricular assist device in advanced heart failure.

The aim of this study was to determine the effects of the HeartWare left ventricular assist device (HVAD) (HeartWare International, Inc, Framingham, MA) on hemodynamics, ventricular function, and exercise capacity. Between July 2009 and March 2011, 46 patients with advanced heart failure had implantation of the HVAD. Of these patients, 30 had subsequent assessments for transplantation and these patients formed the study cohort. Thirty patients had assessments at a mean of 201±86 days and 13 went on to have a second assessment at 351±86 days. There were marked improvements in hemodynamics and exercise capacity at both assessments, with significant decreases in right and left heart filling pressures; increases in cardiac index, New York Heart Association class, and peak exercise oxygen consumption; and reduction in pulmonary vascular resistance (all P<.05). Left ventricular end-diastolic and end-systolic dimensions were unchanged at the first assessment, although there was a significant reduction in end-diastolic diameter at the second assessment (P<.01). There were no significant changes in a visual grade of right ventricular function. After up to 1 year of support, the HVAD system results in significant benefits in overall heart failure status, with improved hemodynamics and exercise capacity. This occurs in the absence of marked changes in left ventricular size or right ventricular function.

An alternative approach to explantation and exchange of the HeartWare left ventricular assist device.

OBJECTIVES: Left ventricular assist device (LVAD) explantation and exchange is a relatively infrequent but potentially complex procedure. Patients requiring such procedures have multisystem suboptimal physiological reserve due to end-stage heart failure and are prone to complications. Less-invasive procedures are believed to facilitate postoperative recovery and early mobilization. We describe an alternative approach to explantation and exchange of the HeartWare LVAD through left thoracotomy. METHODS: Six patients (M = 4, F = 2, mean age = 49.16 years) underwent device explant/exchange or initial implant (explant = 2, exchange = 3, initial implant = 1) through left thoracotomy utilizing cardiopulmonary bypass and induced ventricular fibrillation (VF). The mean bypass time and mean VF arrest time were 82 and 3 min, respectively. A new outflow graft was anastomosed to the previous outflow graft in 3 cases of device exchange and to the descending aorta in 1 case of initial implant. RESULTS: One patient died in the intensive care unit due to unrelated causes (gram-negative sepsis) after device exchange. All others were discharged alive and currently remain on follow-up. The mean length of hospital stay was 40.66 days. CONCLUSIONS: On-pump approach through single thoracotomy incision is safe and equally suitable for device explant, exchange and initial implant. However, structural heart defects requiring surgical correction and the requirement of simultaneous right ventricular assist device are the limitations of this approach.

Lung transplantation for patients with cystic fibrosis and Burkholderia cepacia complex infection: a single-center experience.

BACKGROUND: Pre-operative infection with organisms from the Burkholderia cepacia complex (BCC), particularly B cenocepacia, has been linked with a poorer prognosis after transplantation compared to patients with cystic fibrosis (CF) without this infection. Therefore, many transplant centers do not list these patients for transplantation. METHODS: We report the early and long-term results of a cohort of lung transplant recipients with CF and pre-operative BCC infection. Patients with pre-transplantation BCC infection were identified by case-note review. BCC species status was assigned by polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based techniques. Survival rates were compared to recipients with CF without BCC infection. Survival rates in BCC subgroups were also compared, and then further analyzed pre- and post-2001, when a new immunosuppressive and antibiotic regime was introduced for such patients. RESULTS: Two hundred sixteen patients with CF underwent lung transplantation and 22 had confirmed pre-operative BCC infection, with 12 of these being B cenocepacia. Nine B cenocepacia-infected recipients died within the first year, and in 8 BCC sepsis was considered to be the cause of death. Despite instituting a tailored peri-operative immunosuppressive and microbiologic care approach for such patients, post-transplantation BCC septic deaths occurred frequently in those with pre-transplantation B cenocepacia infection. In contrast, recipients infected with other BCC species had significantly better outcomes, with post-transplantation survival comparable to other recipients with CF. CONCLUSIONS: Mortality in patients with B cenocepacia infection was unacceptably high and has led to our center no longer accepting patients with this condition onto the lung transplant waiting list. Long-term survival in the non-B cenocepacia BCC group was excellent, without high rates of acute rejection or bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome (BOS) longer term, and these patients continue to be considered for lung transplantation.

Subclavian cannulation improves outcome of surgery for type a aortic dissection.

Acute type A aortic dissection is a major emergency that continues to cause significant morbidity and mortality. Given the anatomy of the lesion, different circulatory configurations achieved during cardiopulmonary bypass using different arterial inflow sites can influence outcome. Patients who had subclavian artery cannulation were compared with those who had femoral artery cannulation. Forty-nine consecutive patients (mean age, 60 +/- 14 years) undergoing emergency surgery for acute type A aortic dissection between 1999 and 2004 were reviewed. Data on presentation, preoperative characteristics, operative details, hospital mortality, and neurological outcome were analyzed. Twenty-nine patients had femoral artery cannulation, and 20 had subclavian artery cannulation. The groups were comparable in terms of preoperative characteristics. The mean follow-up was 29 months. Subclavian artery cannulation conferred significant advantages in respect of hospital death (10% vs. 44%) and neurological impairment. Significantly fewer patients required re-operation following subclavian artery cannulation.

Coronary ostial stenosis after aortic valve replacement, revisited.

Coronary artery occlusive disease that develops after an uncomplicated aortic valve replacement is well recognized. We present a case that required two further coronary operations and two salvage angioplasty procedures for a continuing fibrotic process in the ascending aorta. The literature and pathology are reviewed.