Patients with severe aortic stenosis and coexisting pulmonary hypertension treated by transapical transcatheter aortic valve replacement-Is there a need for increased attention?

OBJECTIVES: Aim of this study is to elucidate the impact of pulmonary hypertension on patients treated with a transapical aortic valve replacement. BACKGROUND: In patients with aortic stenosis (AS) the coexistence of pulmonary hypertension (PH) is associated with increased peri-operative risk for surgical aortic valve replacement. For transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), it is unknown whether transapical TAVR (TA-TAVR) is associated with increased peri-interventional risk in PH patients. METHODS: We performed a single center analysis in 189 patients with severe AS with (AS + PH) or without PH (AS - PH) undergoing TA-TAVR. PH was defined by mean pulmonary artery pressure ≥25 mmHg assessed by right heart catheterization (exclusion of 64 patients due to missing results). As the primary endpoint a combination of 30-day mortality or cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) was analyzed. RESULTS: Seventy three patients (58.4%) had PH. Increased peri-interventional risk in AS + PH patients was reflected by an increased rate of the primary endpoint in comparison to AS - PH patients (24.7 vs. 3.8%; p = .002). A higher proportion of acute kidney injury (34.2 vs. 15.7%; p = .025) was found in AS + PH patients while AS - PH patients showed a higher rate of bleeding in comparison AS + PH patients (18.5 vs. 6.8% p = .050). CONCLUSION: Patients with AS + PH treated by TA-TAVR are at increased peri-interventional risk for severe complications in comparison to AS - PH patients. Therefore, the identification of preventive therapeutic strategies is needed. CLASSIFICATIONS: TAVR, transapical, pulmonary hypertension, aortic stenosis.

Mid-term single-center outcomes of BioIntegral compared to Freestyle aortic conduit implantation.

BACKGROUND: Full aortic root replacement with biological conduit has limited options. This non-randomized cohort study aims to compare mid-term clinical and hemodynamic results of the BioIntegral (BI) composite biological versus the stentless Freestyle (FS) conduits in patients undergoing full aortic root replacement. METHODS: From February 2013 to July 2017, 265 patients underwent aortic root replacement at a single institution (202 BI, 65 FS). Preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative parameters, complications including stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), endocarditis and reoperation were studied. Hemodynamic performance of both conduits was analyzed by echocardiography. Target endpoints were 30-day mortality, two-year survival, two-year freedom from major adverse valve-related and cardiovascular events. RESULTS: Wider BI conduits were used (BI 27±2 vs. FS 25±2 mm, P<0.0001). The BI group had shorter cardiopulmonary bypass (BI 165±67 vs. FS 200±78 min, P<0.0001) and cross-clamp (BI 102±36 vs. FS 122±40 min, P=0.001) times. Thirty-day mortality was similar in both groups. There were fewer conduit-related reoperations in the BI group (BI 0% vs. FS 3%, P=0.012) but higher postoperative atrial fibrillation (BI 31% vs. FS 17%, P=0.025). No significant differences were observed for stroke (BI 5% vs. FS 10%, P=0.947), MI (BI 3% vs. FS 4%, P=0.583), or infective endocarditis (BI 0% vs. FS 2%, P=0.077). No significant hemodynamic differences were evident on follow-up echocardiography while an improved overall survival trend was seen in the BI group (P=0.062). CONCLUSIONS: FS and BI provide comparable clinical mid-term results and hemodynamic parameters. Simplified implantation technique providing shorter cardiopulmonary bypass and operation times are advantageous for BI.

Prediction of One-Year Mortality Based upon A New Staged Mortality Risk Model in Patients with Aortic Stenosis Undergoing Transcatheter Valve Replacement.

BACKGROUND: In-depth knowledge about potential predictors of mortality in transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is still warranted. Currently used risk stratification models for TAVR often fail to reach a holistic approach. We, therefore, aimed to create a new staged risk model for 1-year mortality including several new categories including (a) AS-entities (b) cardiopulmonary hemodynamics (c) comorbidities, and (d) different access routes. METHODS: 737 transfemoral (TF) TAVR (84.3%) and 137 transapical (TA) TAVR (15.7%) patients were included. Predictors of 1-year mortality were assessed according to the aforementioned categories. RESULTS: Over-all 1-year mortality (n = 100, 11.4%) was significantly higher in the TA TAVR group (TF vs. TA TAVR: 10.0% vs. 18.9 %; p = 0.0050*). By multivariate cox-regression analysis, a three-staged model was created in patients with fulfilled categories (TF TAVR: n = 655, 88,9%; TA TAVR: n = 117, 85.4%). Patients in "stage 2" showed 1.7-fold (HR 1.67; CI 1.07-2.60; p = 0.024*) and patients in "stage 3" 3.5-fold (HR 3.45; CI 1.97-6.05; p < 0.0001*) enhanced risk to die within 1 year. Mortality increased with every stage and reached the highest rates of 42.5% in "stage 3" (plogrank < 0.0001*), even when old- and new-generation devices (plogrank = n.s) were sub-specified. CONCLUSIONS: This new staged mortality risk model had incremental value for prediction of 1-year mortality after TAVR independently from the TAVR-era.

Contrary to Expectations: Off-Label Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in the Case of Left Ventricular Outflow Tract Obstruction.

We present the case of a 71-year-old woman who showed recurrent signs of congestive heart failure with the need of rehospitalization after double valve (mitral and aortic) replacement. Extensive diagnostic workup revealed a moderate aortic stenosis and additionally a significant left ventricular outflow tract obstruction. The tissue overgrowth might be attributed to an inflammatory reaction with extensive pannus deposit after aortic valve surgery. With no-option for re-do surgery we performed the first-in-man off-label valve-in-left ventricular outflow tract procedure with an Edwards Sapien III 23 mm in deep orientation.

TAVI as Therapy of Choice for Aortic Valve Disease in Osteogenesis Imperfecta.

Osteogenesis imperfecta (OI) is a syndrome that is often associated with dysfunction of the aortic valve. Because of the resultant fragile vessels and impaired hemostasis, surgical therapy to treat OI is challenging. Previous reports have suggested that transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) might be a suitable treatment for this condition. To the best of the authors' knowledge, the present case is the first to describe a young patient who underwent successful TAVI to treat osteogenesis imperfecta. The proposal of transfemoral TAVI serving as first-line therapy for aortic valve stenosis in patients suffering from osteogenesis imperfect was confirmed.

Implantation of a SAPIEN 3 Valve in a Patient with Pure Aortic Regurgitation.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is an emerging treatment for high-risk patients with aortic stenosis. Aortic regurgitation is considered to be a relative contraindication for transcatheter procedures, as a non-calcified aortic annulus poses the risk of an insufficient anchoring of the transcatheter aortic valve prosthesis. Herein is described the case of a patient who suffered from recurrent aortic valve regurgitation after valve-sparing repair, and which was successfully treated by the transcatheter implantation of an Edwards SAPIEN 3™ prosthesis. This case report demonstrated the suitability of this prosthesis to treat pure aortic valve regurgitation, without excessive oversizing of the valve.

Comparison of Manual and Automated Preprocedural Segmentation Tools to Predict the Annulus Plane Angulation and C-Arm Positioning for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.

BACKGROUND: Preprocedural manual multi-slice-CT-segmentation tools (MSCT-ST) define the gold standard for planning transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). They are able to predict the perpendicular line of the aortic annulus (PPL) and to indicate the corresponding C-arm angulation (CAA). Fully automated planning-tools and their clinical relevance have not been systematically evaluated in a real world setting so far. METHODS AND RESULTS: The study population consists of an all-comers cohort of 160 consecutive TAVR patients with a drop out of 35 patients for technical and anatomical reasons. 125 TAVR patients underwent preprocedural analysis by manual (M-MSCT) and fully automated MSCT-ST (A-MSCT). Method-comparison was performed for 105 patients (Cohort A). In Cohort A, CAA was defined for each patient, and accordance within 10° between M-MSCT and A-MSCT was considered adequate for concept-proof (95% in LAO/RAO; 94% in CRAN/CAUD). Intraprocedural CAA was defined by repetitive angiograms without utilizing the preprocedural measurements. In Cohort B, intraprocedural CAA was established with the use of A-MSCT (20 patients). Using preprocedural A-MSCT to indicate the corresponding CAA, the levels of contrast medium (ml) and radiation exposure (cine runs) were reduced in Cohort B compared to Cohort A significantly (23.3±10.3 vs. 35.3 ±21.1 ml, p = 0.02; 1.6±0.7 vs. 2.4±1.4 cine runs; p = 0.02) and trends towards more safety in valve-positioning could be demonstrated. CONCLUSIONS: A-MSCT-analysis provides precise preprocedural information on CAA for optimal visualization of the aortic annulus compared to the M-MSCT gold standard. Intraprocedural application of this information during TAVR significantly reduces the levels of contrast and radiation exposure. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01805739.

Quality of Life Shift after Aortic Valve Replacement in the Era of TAVI: Single-Center Class Comparison Study Between Different Procedural Techniques.

BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY: The health-related quality of life (QOL) is one of the most important outcome indicators for elderly people undergoing aortic valve interventions, and should be assessed across different interventions, including emerging percutaneous techniques. The study aim was to assess the change in QOL after different procedures for aortic valve replacement (AVR). METHODS: QOL was assessed using the Short Form-36 questionnaire (SF-36) for 59 patients after conventional AVR; of these patients, 28 had AVR via a J-sternotomy, a transapical approach was used in 20 patients, and a transfemoral approach in 34. RESULTS: The early mortality during hospitalization was not significantly different among all four groups. The inverse probability weighted propensity scores adjusted Kaplan-Meier curve revealed that the transapical group had the lowest survival rate. The treatment effect analysis was most prominent in the transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) group across all domains for QOL. The multivariate hierarchical linear mixed final fitted model shows that the transapical TAVI procedure and NYHA class (III-IV) had a significant negative effect on the physical domain and overall QOL score. CONCLUSION: Changes in QOL after interventions on the aortic valve were determined by the patient's preoperative status and the surgical intervention. The transcatheter intervention, even in 'sicker' patients, provided a gain in QOL comparable with that after an open-heart procedure. Transfemoral TAVI was shown to have advantages over transapical TAVI in terms of QOL improvement at three months and six months, and should be considered the first choice for patients in the high-risk surgical group.

Successful acute type A aortic dissection repair in a nonagenarian.

Surgical repair in older patients with acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD) evokes a higher peri- and postoperative mortality, it therefore remains controversial in nonagenarians. The authors present a case of a surgically managed ATAAD in a nonagenerian, a 94-year-old man presented with an uncomplicated ATAAD, necessitating emergency surgical repair. The subsequent postoperative course was uneventful, and the patient was discharged after uncomplicated recovery. Aggressive surgical approach should be feasable in select nonagenarian patients with ATAAD, depending on the clinical presention and prior patient history.

Comparison of different surgical techniques in 112 consecutive patients with aortic root operations: when should the valve be spared?

BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY: The benefit of valve-sparing aortic root replacement compared to conventional aortic root replacement surgery remains unclear. METHODS: Between February 2009 and November 2010, a total of 112 patients underwent aortic root surgery at the Department of Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery, Heinrich-Heine-University, Dusseldorf, Germany. The valve-sparing technique was used when leaflets were grossly normal. In cases where the valve could not be saved, a prosthetic or biological substitute was used for the aortic root, according to existing guidelines. The patients were allocated to three groups: (i) valve-sparing aortic root replacement group using the David technique (VSR-David; n = 47); (ii) valve-replacing aortic root surgery with a prosthetic conduit using the Bentall-Kuchucus technique (VRR-Prosthetic; n = 31); and (iii) valve-replacing aortic root surgery with a biological stentless valve with the full root technique (VRR-Bio; n = 34). RESULTS: Intraoperative data revealed that, in the VSR-David group, the cardiopulmonary bypass and cross-clamp times were significantly longer (207 +/- 68 min and 140 +/- 38 min respectively; both p = 0.001). The VRR-Prosthetic patients were at highest risk (mean EuroSCORE 15.9%) compared to the VSR-David and VRR-Bio groups (10.8% and 10.4%, respectively). Postoperative analysis showed that patients in the VRR-Bio group had the lowest number of perioperative heart failures (p = 0.004). The perioperative 30-day mortality was significantly higher in the VRR-Prosthetic group (22.6%; p = 0.004). Transaortic flow velocities were significantly lower in the VSR-David group, followed by the VRR-Bio group and VRR-Prosthetic group (1.66 +/- 0.54, 1.98 +/- 0.45, and 2.29 +/- 0.39 m/s, respectively; p = 0.012). The univariate and multivariate analyses of perioperative risk factors showed that only open distal anastomosis was strongly associated with negative results, but not the valve-sparing technique. CONCLUSION: Aortic valve-sparing root replacement must be considered as an excellent alternative for young patients requiring aortic root replacement when a biological valve is clinically indicated. For patients aged >65 years, or with a decreased life expectancy, the full root technique with a stentless valve should be used, given its technical simplicity and excellent postoperative results.

Rescue operation after ascending thoracic endovascular aortic repair in a patient with thrombosis of the left main coronary ostium.

Transfemoral stent graft implantation in the ascending aorta has been performed in patients with aortic abnormalities and particularly in the case of an existing symptomatic thrombus. We report on a 68-year old male patient who presented to our clinic with angina-pectoris-like chest pain after having been treated with an aortic stent graft. A computed tomography scan revealed a thrombus in the left main stem that could be successfully removed. The aortic stent graft was removed and the supracoronary ascending aorta replaced.

Role of primary bacterial contamination of a pulmonary homograft for Ross operation: report of a case and review of the literature.

In a 43-year-old female, Ross operation was performed with annular reinforcement of the autograft and a cryo-fixed homograft that proved to be contaminated with enterobacter cloacae and klebsiella pneumoniae at the time of operation. Clinical course was unremarkable, perhaps due to effective antibiotic prophylaxis and treatment. In the literature, little is known about intraoperative bacterial contamination and early endocarditis. The authors report what they believe is the second reported case. Particular resistibilities of homograft and autograft might make early endocarditis unlikely.