Future of left atrial appendage interventions.

Percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO), currently recognized as a procedure with relatively low risk, is increasingly being adopted in clinical practice. However, due to the preventive nature of the procedure and the necessity to compare it with newer and safer oral anticoagulants, further optimization is required to address remaining challenges. These latter include acquiring comprehensive data on safety and efficacy, establishing standardized pre-procedural planning, and simplifying procedural process. Consequently, we have provided an overview that encompasses future opportunities for enhancing procedural safety and efficacy, thereby establishing LAAO as the mainstream strategy for stroke and systemic embolism prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation and absolute contraindications to anticoagulant drugs.

Native Aortic Valve Resection Using a Novel Blade-Based Device.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to validate the use of a new resection device in patient candidates for surgical aortic valve replacement. We evaluated the efficacy of this new circular blade to resect the aortic valve and the efficacy to collect the debris during the resection. METHODS: For this study, a single size instrument was used, with an external diameter of 22 mm, and patients were selected on the basis of the preoperative assessment of the aortic diameters. RESULTS: From October 2018 to June 2019, 10 patient candidates for surgical aortic valve replacement were selected to undergo native aortic valve resection using a new device, before surgical valve implantation. The mean age of the patients was 74 ± 7.6 years, and 8 of 10 were male. The mean aortic annulus diameter, measured before the procedure, was 25.7 ± 1.57 mm. The resection was complete in 9 (90%) patients. In 1 patient, due to an imprecise positioning of the device, the valve resection was partial. None of the patients showed signs or symptoms due to debris embolism. In all patients, the postoperative course was uneventful. CONCLUSIONS: These preliminary results show that resection of the aortic valve using a circular foldable blade is feasible. This prototype, used during conventional surgery even through a small incision, provided an efficient tool to easily resect the valve without debris release.

Long-Term Clinical and Echocardiographic Outcomes Following the Ross Procedure: A Post Hoc Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The Ross procedure as treatment for adults with aortic valve disease (AVD) has been the subject of renewed interest. Objective: To evaluate the long-term clinical and echocardiographic outcomes following the Ross procedure for the treatment of adults with AVD. Design, Setting, and Participants: This post hoc analysis of a randomized clinical trial included adult patients (age <69 years) who underwent a Ross procedure for the treatment of AVD, including those with active endocarditis, rheumatic AVD, decreased ejection fraction, and previous cardiac surgery. The trial, conducted from September 1, 1994, to May 31, 2001, compared homograft root replacement with the Ross procedure at a single center. Data after 2010 were collected retrospectively in November and December 2022. Exposure: Ross procedure. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was long-term survival among patients who underwent the Ross procedure compared with that in the age-, country of origin- and sex-matched general population. Secondary end points were freedom from any reintervention, autograft reintervention, or homograft reintervention and time-related valve function, autograft diameter, and functional status. Results: This study included 108 adults (92 [85%] male) with a median age of 38 years (range, 19-66 years). Median duration of clinical follow-up was 24.1 years (IQR, 22.6-26.1 years; 2488 patient-years), with 98% follow-up completeness. Of these patients, 9 (8%) had active endocarditis and 45 (42%) underwent reoperations. The main hemodynamic lesion was stenosis in 30 (28%) and regurgitation in 49 (45%). There was 1 perioperative death (0.9%). Twenty-five year survival was 83.0% (95% CI, 75.5%-91.2%), representing a relative survival of 99.1% (95% CI, 91.8%-100%) compared with the general population (83.7%). At 25 years, freedom from any reintervention was 71.1% (95% CI, 61.6%-82.0%); from autograft reintervention, 80.3% (95% CI, 71.9%-89.6%); and from homograft reintervention, 86.3% (95% CI, 79.0%-94.3%). Thirty-day mortality after the first Ross-related reintervention was 0% and after all Ross-related reinterventions was 3.8% (n = 1); 10-year survival after reoperation was 96.2% (95% CI, 89.0%-100%). Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that the Ross procedure provided excellent survival into the third decade postoperatively that was comparable to that in the general population. Long-term freedom from reintervention demonstrated that the Ross procedure may be a durable substitute into late adulthood, showing a delayed but progressive functional decline. Trial Registration: isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN03530985.

Late results of aortic valve repair for isolated severe aortic regurgitation.

OBJECTIVES: The objectives were to analyze the long-term outcomes of tricuspid aortic valve repair for isolated severe aortic regurgitation and the impact of different annuloplasty techniques. METHODS: The study cohort consists of 127 consecutive patients who received aortic valve repair for isolated severe aortic regurgitation in the tricuspid aortic valve between 1996 and 2019 in our institution. Exclusion criteria were aorta dilatation (≥45 mm), connective tissue disease, active endocarditis, type A dissection, and rheumatic disease. Mean age of patients was 55.6 ± 16 years, and 80% were male. Median follow-up was 6.4 years. Time-to-event analysis was performed, as well as risk of death, reoperation, and aortic regurgitation recurrence. RESULTS: Cusp repair was performed in 117 patients (92%), and annuloplasty was performed in 126 patients (99%) with Cabrol stitch (73%), reimplantation technique (19.7%), or ring annuloplasty (6.3%). There was no hospital mortality. At 10 and 14 years, overall survival was 81% ± 5% and 71% ± 6%, respectively, and freedom from reoperation was 80% ± 5% and 73% ± 6%, respectively. Age and left coronary cusp repair were independent predictors of reoperation. Freedom from recurrent severe aortic regurgitation (>2+) was 73% ± 5% and 66% ± 7% at 10 and 12 years, respectively. Age, left ventricular end-diastolic diameter, and patch repair were independent predictors of recurrent aortic regurgitation. Type of annuloplasty had no impact on survival or reoperation. CONCLUSIONS: Aortic valve repair for isolated severe aortic regurgitation in the tricuspid aortic valve is a safe procedure, and durability at 14 years is acceptable. In this study, the annuloplasty technique did not influence repair durability as was found in bicuspid aortic valve repair or aortic valve-sparing surgery. Severity of cusp pathology seems to be the main determinant of repair durability.

Simulation-based assessment of robotic cardiac surgery skills: An international multicenter, cross-specialty trial.

Objective: This study aimed to investigate the validity of simulation-based assessment of robotic-assisted cardiac surgery skills using a wet lab model, focusing on the use of a time-based score (TBS) and modified Global Evaluative Assessment of Robotic Skills (mGEARS) score. Methods: We tested 3 wet lab tasks (atrial closure, mitral annular stitches, and internal thoracic artery [ITA] dissection) with both experienced robotic cardiac surgeons and novices from multiple European centers. The tasks were assessed using 2 tools: TBS and mGEARS score. Reliability, internal consistency, and the ability to discriminate between different levels of competence were evaluated. Results: The results demonstrated a high internal consistency for all 3 tasks using mGEARS assessment tool. The mGEARS score and TBS could reliably discriminate between different levels of competence for the atrial closure and mitral stitches tasks but not for the ITA harvesting task. A generalizability study also revealed that it was feasible to assess competency of the atrial closure and mitral stitches tasks using mGEARS but not the ITA dissection task. Pass/fail scores were established for each task using both TBS and mGEARS assessment tools. Conclusions: The study provides sufficient evidence for using TBS and mGEARS scores in evaluating robotic-assisted cardiac surgery skills in wet lab settings for intracardiac tasks. Combining both assessment tools enhances the evaluation of proficiency in robotic cardiac surgery, paving the way for standardized, evidence-based preclinical training and credentialing. Clinical trial registry number: NCT05043064.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of mid-term survival, reoperation, and recurrent mitral regurgitation for robotic-assisted mitral valve repair.

Background: Over the past two decades surgical approaches for mitral valve (MV) disease have evolved with the advent of minimally invasive techniques. Robotic mitral valve repair (RMVr) safety and efficacy has been well documented, however, mid- to long-term data are limited. The aim of this review was to provide a comprehensive analysis of the available mid- to long-term data for RMVr. Methods: Electronic searches of five databases were performed to identify all relevant studies reporting minimum five-year data on RMVr. Pre-defined primary outcomes of interest were overall survival, freedom from MV reoperation and from moderate or worse mitral regurgitation (MR) at five years or more post-RMVr. A meta-analysis of proportions or means was performed, utilizing a random effects model, to present the data. Kaplan-Meier curves were aggregated using reconstructed individual patient data. Results: Nine studies totaling 3,300 patients undergoing RMVr were identified. Rates of overall survival at 1-, 5- and 10-year were 99.2%, 97.4% and 92.3%, respectively. Freedom from MV reoperation at eight-years post RMVr was 95.0%. Freedom from moderate or worse MR at seven years was 86.0%. Rates of early post-operative complications were low with only 0.2% all-cause mortality and 1.0% cerebrovascular accident. Reoperation for bleeding was low at 2.2% and successful RMVr was 99.8%. Mean intensive care unit and hospital stay were 22.4 hours and 5.2 days, respectively. Conclusions: RMVr is a safe procedure with low rates of early mortality and other complications. It can be performed with low complication rates in high volume, experienced centers. Evaluation of available mid-term data post-RMVr suggests favorable rates of overall survival, freedom from MV reoperation and from moderate or worse MR recurrence.

Robotic mitral valve repair-the Bruxelles experience.

Background: Although the use of the surgical robot facilitates less invasive mitral valve surgery, both real and perceived limitations have slowed the application of this technology. Aim of the present investigation was to report the early and long-term results of robotic mitral valve repair in a single institution over a 10-year period. Methods: Between March 2012 and May 2022, a total of 278 consecutive patients underwent robotically assisted mitral valve repair at the Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc (Brussels, Belgium). Indications have evolved over time allowing the treatment of complex mitral valve lesions. Clinical and echocardiographic follow-up were 97.8% and 86.1% complete, respectively. Results: Mean age of the study population was 57.8±11.9 years and 221/278 (79.5%) patients were male. Despite being asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic [New York Heart Association (NYHA) class I-II], most of the patients presented with severe mitral regurgitation (MR). Degenerative mitral valve disease was the most common cause of MR. All patients underwent successful mitral valve repair using different techniques, and 25/278 (9.0%) had one or more concomitant procedures associated. The mean cardio-pulmonary bypass and aortic cross clamp times were 153±37 and 106±25 minutes, respectively. There was no operative or in-hospital mortality. Overall survival rate was 97.8%±3.2%, 95.8%±3.2% and 93.7%±3.0% at 3, 7 and 10 years. One early (0.4%) reoperation with re-repair was recorded for ring disruption, while late mitral valve re-repair was necessary in 4/279 (1.4%) patients for recurrent severe MR in three of them and mitral endocarditis in one. The overall freedom from mitral valve reoperation was 98.1%±1.0% at 3, 7 and 10 years. Overall freedom from MR (grade 2+ or more) was 91.7%±3.2%, 77.8%±4.8% and 67.1%±9.2% at 3, 7 and 10 years, respectively. Conclusions: Robotic mitral valve repair is safe and is associated with excellent clinical and echocardiographic results. The use of robotic technologies allows, after an appropriate learning curve, to reproduce all conventional techniques to treat MR, regardless of the complexity of the valve lesion.

Robotic mitral valve repair: A single center experience over a 7-year period.

BACKGROUND: We report the clinical and echocardiographic results of our experience in robotic mitral valve repair over a 7-year period. The outcomes of the earliest and the latest patients will be compared. METHODS: Between March 2012 and October 2019, 226 patients underwent robotic mitral valve repair for severe mitral regurgitation in a single institution. The first 113 patients (Group 1) were operated between March 2012 and September 2015 and the last 113 patients (Group 2) between October 2015 and October 2019. Conventional techniques employed in open surgery were used. Clinical and echographic follow-up were 96.0% and 94.2% complete, respectively. RESULTS: Successful mitral repair was achieved in all cases with no hospital mortality. The overall survival rate was 92.7 ± 2.8% and 91.0 ± 3.2% at 3 and 7 years, respectively, with no in between groups difference (p = 0.513). The overall freedom from mitral reoperation was 97.4 ± 1.2% at 3 and 7 years and was similar in both groups (p = 0.276). Freedom from mitral regurgitation Grade 2+ at 3 and 7 years were 89.1 ± 2.6% and 87.9 ± 2.8%, respectively, with no significant difference between groups (p = 0.056). CONCLUSIONS: Developing a robotic mitral repair program can be done without compromising the safety and efficacy of repair. After a well-conducted training, robotic approach allows to perform simple and complex mitral repair using similar techniques as in conventional approach and without additional risk for the patient.

Congenital unicuspid aortic valve repair without cusp patch augmentation.

Unicuspid aortic valves are rare congenital malformations. Surgical repair is feasible in aortic regurgitation, and in some cases of aortic stenosis. The standard surgical approach is a bicuspidization and symmetrization with pericardial patch augmentation of valve leaflets. Herein, we are describing our original technique for bicuspidization of a unicuspid aortic valve in adults without leaflet patch augmentation. We also address the surgical management of a commissural diastasis.

Corrigendum: Robotic Cardiac Surgery in Europe: Status 2020.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2021.827515.].

Mitral valve repair for endocarditis.

Many authors have reported their results of mitral valve (MV) repair (MVr) in acute and healed endocarditis. However, the results published by different authors highlight the fact that the reparability rate for this indication remains low. Over the last three decades, our group has adopted an early and repair-oriented approach to infective endocarditis with the objective to improve the repair rate and the long-term results.‬ ‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬ In this paper, we describe our institutional experience on mitral valve repair for infective endocarditis.‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬ Data for this paper were extracted from our institutional database on heart valve disease. From 1991 to 2015, 160 consecutive patients in our institution underwent MV surgery for active IE on native MV. The median follow-up was 122 months. This study was approved by the institutional ethics review board, and written informed consent was waived for this study given its retrospective design. Hospital mortality was 11.6% (n = 18). Early MV reoperation before hospital discharge was required in five (3.1%) patients. At 5, 10, and 15 years, overall survival in the MVr for endocarditis in the group was 79% ± 4%, 65% ± 5%, 57% ± 6%, respectively. Freedom from reoperation at 5, 10, and 15 years was 95% ± 2%, 88% ± 4%, and 81% ± 6%, respectively. Mitral infective endocarditis is an insidious pathology and his surgical approach can be challenging. An early and repair-oriented surgical approach can allow to improve reparability rates with good long-term durability and a low recurrence rate of endocarditis.

Long-term durability of bicuspid aortic valve repair: a comparison of 2 annuloplasty techniques.

OBJECTIVES: To compare long-term outcomes after bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) repair utilizing the Cabrol annuloplasty versus valve sparing Reimplantation technique. METHODS: From 1996 to 2018, 340 consecutive patients underwent BAV repair. Eighty underwent Cabrol annuloplasty and 189 underwent Reimplantation. Exclusion criteria were re-repairs (n = 6), active endocarditis (n = 4), no annuloplasty (n = 41) and ring or suture annuloplasty (n = 20). We compared both groups for survival, reoperations, valve related events and recurrent severe aortic regurgitation (AR > 2+). Inverse probability weighting (IPW) was used to balance the 2 groups. Cox regression analysis was used to identify outcome predictors. RESULTS: After weighting, pre- and intraoperative characteristics were similar between groups, except for aorta replacement techniques and operative time, which was longer in the Reimplantation group (P < 0.001). At 12 years, overall survival was similar between groups (IPW: Cabrol 97 ± 2% vs Reimplantation 94 ± 3%, P = 0.52). Freedom from reoperation and freedom from AR > 2+ were significantly lower in the Cabrol group (reoperation IPW: 69 ± 9% vs 91 ± 4%, P = 0.004 and AR > 2+ IPW: 71 ± 8% vs 97 ± 2%, P < 0.001). The Reimplantation technique was the only independent predictor of reoperation (hazard ratio 0.31; confidence interval 0.19-0.7; P = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, comparing 2 annuloplasty strategies for BAV repair, we found statistically significant differences in long-term durability favouring the Reimplantation technique, and no differences in overall survival. The results support our current strategy of Reimplantation technique and repair of AR in patients with BAV. Cabrol annuloplasty is obsolete and should be generally abandoned in patients undergoing BAV repair for AR.

Two decades of valve-sparing root reimplantation in tricuspid aortic valve: impact of aortic regurgitation and cusp repair.

OBJECTIVES: Our goal was to analyse the influence of preoperative aortic regurgitation (AR) on the necessity of cusp repair during valve-sparing reimplantation (VSR). We focused on patients with tricuspid aortic valves (TAV) and evaluated the impact of AR and cusp repair on long-term outcomes. METHODS: From March 1998 to December 2018, a total of 512 consecutive patients underwent VSR at our institution; of these, 303 had a TAV. The mean age was 53 ± 15 years, and the median follow-up was 6.12 years. The rate and type of cusp repair were analysed based on preoperative AR. Time-to-event analysis was performed, as well as risk of death, reoperation and AR recurrence. RESULTS: Cusp repair was necessary in 168 (55.4%) patients; the rate rose significantly as AR grade increased (P < 0.001). In-hospital mortality was 1% (n = 3). At 5 and 10 years, overall survival was 92 ± 2% and 75 ± 5%, respectively. Freedom from valve reoperation was 95 ± 2% and 90 ± 3%. Freedom from AR >2+ and AR >1+ at 10 years was 88 ± 4% and 70.4 ± 4.6%, respectively. Independent predictors of death included age, New York Heart Association functional class and type-A aortic dissection. Predictors of AR greater than mild included previous cardiac surgery and severe preoperative AR. CONCLUSION: In patients with TAV receiving VSR, the necessity of cusp repair increased with the degree of preoperative AR. Preoperative AR and cusp repair do not impact long-term survival and aortic valve reoperation, but severe preoperative AR and multiple cusp repair increase the risk of recurrent moderate-to-severe AR. Overall, cusp repair seems to attenuate the negative impact of preoperative AR for at least 1 decade in a majority of patients.

Robotic Cardiac Surgery in Europe: Status 2020.

BACKGROUND: European surgeons were the first worldwide to use robotic techniques in cardiac surgery and major steps in procedure development were taken in Europe. After a hype in the early 2000s case numbers decreased but due to technological improvements renewed interest can be noted. We assessed the current activities and outcomes in robotically assisted cardiac surgery on the European continent. METHODS: Data were collected in an international anonymized registry of 26 European centers with a robotic cardiac surgery program. RESULTS: During a 4-year period (2016-2019), 2,563 procedures were carried out [30.0% female, 58.5 (15.4) years old, EuroSCORE II 1.56 (1.74)], including robotically assisted coronary bypass grafting (n = 1266, 49.4%), robotic mitral or tricuspid valve surgery (n = 945, 36.9%), isolated atrial septal defect closure (n = 225, 8.8%), left atrial myxoma resection (n = 54, 2.1%), and other procedures (n = 73, 2.8%). The number of procedures doubled during the study period (from n = 435 in 2016 to n = 923 in 2019). The mean cardiopulmonary bypass time in pump assisted cases was 148.6 (63.5) min and the myocardial ischemic time was 88.7 (46.1) min. Conversion to larger thoracic incisions was required in 56 cases (2.2%). Perioperative rates of revision for bleeding, stroke, and mortality were 56 (2.2%), 6 (0.2 %), and 27 (1.1%), respectively. Median postoperative hospital length of stay was 6.6 (6.6) days. CONCLUSION: Robotic cardiac surgery case numbers in Europe are growing fast, including a large spectrum of procedures. Conversion rates are low and clinical outcomes are favorable, indicating safe conduct of these high-tech minimally invasive procedures.

Long-term experience with valve-sparing root reimplantation surgery in tricuspid aortic valve.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze our long-term experience with valve-sparing reimplantation technique in treating aortic root aneurysm, aortic regurgitation, and aortic dissection in patients with tricuspid aortic valve. METHODS: Between March 1998 and October 2018, 303 consecutive patients underwent valve-sparing reimplantation in our institution. The mean age of this cohort was 52.9 ± 15 years. Time to event analysis was performed with the Kaplan-Meier method. Risk of death, reoperation, and aortic regurgitation (AR) recurrence were analyzed using the cox-regression method. RESULTS: In-hospital mortality was 1% (n = 3) of which two were admitted for acute aortic dissection. Median follow-up was 5.81 years ([IQR]: 2.8-10 years). Thirty-nine patients (14.4%) died during follow-up. At 5 and 10 years, overall survival was 92 ± 2%and 75 ± 4.9%, respectively. Seventeen patients required late aortic valve reoperation. Freedom from valve reoperation was 95 ± 2% and 90 ± 3%. Freedom from AR > 2+ and AR > 1+ at 10 years was 91 ± 4% and 71.5 ± 4.6%, respectively. Significant multivariate predictors of death included age, New York Heart Association dyspnea class (NYHA), type A acute dissection (TAAD), and preoperative left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD). Significant multivariate predictors of AR recurrence included indication for surgery, previous cardiac surgery, and presence of preoperative AR. Freedom from events like major bleeding, thromboembolic events, and infective endocarditis at 10 years were 97%, 98%, and 96%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Aortic valve-sparing with the reimplantation technique has been performed for over two decades in our institution, and the results in patients with tricuspid aortic valve (TAV) are excellent in terms of survival and freedom from valve-related adverse outcomes including valve reoperation. These results continue supporting the use of valve sparing root replacement using the reimplantation technique (VSRR) in patients with aortic aneurysm, irrespective of whether they have preoperative AR or not. VSRR is safe, durable, and reproducible, but further follow-up, well into the second decade is still necessary.

Aortic valve repair in endocarditis: scope and results.

PURPOSE: Infective endocarditis (IE) remains a prevalent and life-threatening disease. The choice to repair or replace the infected valve still remains a matter of debate, especially in aortic valve (AV) infections. We retrospectively analyze our two decades of experience in aortic valve repair (AVr) in IE. Long-term outcomes are described with particular attention to the impact of valve configuration and the use of patch techniques. METHODS: From September 1998 to June 2017, 42 patients underwent AVr in a single center for IE. Techniques include leaflet patch repair and resuspension and aortic annulus stabilization. RESULTS: Hospital mortality was 2.4% (n = 1). The median follow-up was 90.6 months. Survival was 89 ± 9.4% and 76.6 ± 16% at 5 and 10 years, respectively, with no significant differences between tricuspid aortic valve (TAV) and bicuspid aortic valve (BAV). Freedom from reoperation was 100% and 92.9 ± 7.1% in TAV and 81.8 ± 18.2% and 46.8 ± 28.8% in BAV at 5 and 10 years, respectively (TAV vs BAV, p = 0.02). BAV, degree of preoperative aortic insufficiency, and AVr including patch were factors predicting a higher risk of reoperation during the follow-up. CONCLUSION: In our experience, AVr is a safe, feasible, and efficient choice in selected patients with healed or active IE. Durability of the repair is excellent in patients with limited lesions and in patients with TAV even with patch repair. Reoperations occurred principally in patients with BAV and severe preoperative AI, in whom patch repair was performed. In those patients, we actually recommend to replace the valve in case of active endocarditis.