Transcatheter aortic valve implantation using the SAPIEN 3 valve to treat aortic regurgitation: The French multicentre S3AR study.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation now has a major role in the treatment of patients with severe aortic stenosis. However, evidence is scarce on its feasibility and safety to treat patients with pure aortic regurgitation. AIMS: We sought to evaluate the results of transcatheter aortic valve implantation using the balloon-expandable SAPIEN 3 transcatheter heart valve (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA, USA) in patients with pure aortic regurgitation on native non-calcified valves. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective and prospective French multicentre observational study. We included all patients with symptomatic severe pure aortic regurgitation on native non-calcified valves, contraindicated to or at high risk for surgical valve replacement, who underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation using the SAPIEN 3 transcatheter heart valve. RESULTS: A total of 37 patients (male sex, 73%) with a median age of 81years (interquartile range 69-85years) were screened using transthoracic echocardiography and computed tomography and were included at eight French centres. At baseline, 83.8% of patients (n=31) had dyspnoea New York Heart Association class≥III. The device success rate was 94.6% (n=35). At 30days, the all-cause mortality rate was 8.1% (n=3) and valve migration occurred in 10.8% of cases (n=4). Dyspnoea New York Heart Association class≤II was seen in 86.5% of patients (n=32), and all survivors had aortic regurgitation grade≤1. At 1-year follow-up, all-cause mortality was 16.2% (n=6), 89.7% (n=26/29) of survivors were in New York Heart Association class≤II and all had aortic regurgitation grade≤2. CONCLUSION: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation using the SAPIEN 3 transcatheter heart valve seems promising to treat selected high-risk patients with pure aortic regurgitation on non-calcified native valves, contraindicated to surgical aortic valve replacement.

Prognostic value of a comprehensive geriatric assessment for predicting one-year mortality in presumably frail patients with symptomatic aortic stenosis.

Introduction: Despite suffering a severe aortic stenosis, some patients are denied either surgical or transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) therapy because of a frail condition. We aimed to identify whether a comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) might be useful to predict the prognosis of presumably frail patients with severe aortic stenosis. Material and methods: Between March 2011 and July 2016, 818 patients were consecutively and prospectively enrolled. 161 had a CGA and were considered for analysis. Considering combined CGA and heart team recommendations, 102 TAVI procedures were performed (TAVI group) and 59 patients constituted the no-TAVI group. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality at 1 year. Results: There was no difference between the TAVI and the no-TAVI groups considering morphometric data, cardiovascular risk factors or symptoms. The no-TAVI group had higher surgical risk (logistic EuroSCORE1 33.4 ±17.8 vs. 22.7 ±14.9; p < 0.001) and more moderate renal insufficiency (82% vs. 57%; p = 0.001). One-year mortality was 16% in the TAVI group and 46% in the no-TAVI group (p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed that history of pulmonary edema, moderate renal failure, and not having a TAVI were associated with 1-year mortality. There was an interaction between the Five-Times-Sit-to-Stand-Test (FTSST) and the effect of TAVI on mortality (p = 0.049), as FTSST was the only predictor for 1-year mortality in the no-TAVI group (HR = 0.18, 95% CI: 0.04-0.76; p = 0.019). Conclusions: One-year mortality was higher in geriatric-assessed frail patients who did not undergo TAVI. FTSST, which assesses patients' mobility, was the only prognostic marker for 1-year mortality, on top of the usual medical parameters.

Randomized controlled trial between conventional versus sutureless bioprostheses for aortic valve replacement: Impact of mini and full sternotomy access at 1-year follow-up.

BACKGROUND: The present study is a sub-analysis of the multicenter, randomized PERSIST-AVR trial (PERceval Sutureless Implant versus Standard Aortic Valve Replacement) comparing the in-hospital and 1-year results of sutureless versus conventional stented bioprostheses in isolated surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) within two different surgical approaches: mini-sternotomy (MS) and full-sternotomy (FS). METHODS: A total of 819 patients (per-protocol population) underwent preoperative randomization to sutureless or stented biological valve at 47 centers worldwide. Sub-analysis on isolated SAVR was performed. Results were compared between sutureless and stented within the two different surgical approaches. RESULTS: 285 patients were implanted with Perceval (67% in MS) and 293 with stented valves (65% in MS). Sutureless group showed significantly reduced surgical times both in FS and MS. In-hospital results show no differences between Perceval and stented valves in FS, while a lower incidence of new-onset of atrial fibrillation (3.7% vs 10.8%) with Perceval in MS. After 1-year, use of sutureless valve showed a significant reduction of MACCE (5.2% vs 10.8%), stroke rate (1.0% vs 5.4%), new-onset of atrial fibrillation (4.2% vs 11.4%) and re-hospitalizations (21.8 days vs 47.6 days), compared to stented valves but presented higher rate of pacemaker implantation (11% vs 1.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Sutureless bioprosthesis showed significantly reduced procedural times during isolated SAVR in both surgical approaches. Patients with sutureless valves and MS access showed also better 1-year outcome regarding MACCEs, stroke, re-hospitalization and new-onset atrial fibrillation, but presented a higher rate of permanent pacemaker implantation compared to patients with stented bioprosthesis.

Hemodynamic Performance of Sutureless vs. Conventional Bioprostheses for Aortic Valve Replacement: The 1-Year Core-Lab Results of the Randomized PERSIST-AVR Trial.

OBJECTIVE: Sutureless aortic valves are an effective option for aortic valve replacement (AVR) showing non-inferiority to standard stented aortic valves for major cardiovascular and cerebral events at 1-year. We report the 1-year hemodynamic performance of the sutureless prostheses compared with standard aortic valves, assessed by a dedicated echocardiographic core lab. METHODS: Perceval Sutureless Implant vs. Standard Aortic Valve Replacement (PERSIST-AVR) is a prospective, randomized, adaptive, open-label trial. Patients undergoing AVR, as an isolated or combined procedure, were randomized to receive a sutureless [sutureless aortic valve replacement (Su-AVR)] (n = 407) or a stented sutured [surgical AVR (SAVR)] (n = 412) bioprostheses. Site-reported echocardiographic examinations were collected at 1 year. In addition, a subgroup of the trial population (Su-AVR n = 71, SAVR = 82) had a complete echocardiographic examination independently assessed by a Core Lab (MedStar Health Research Institute, Washington D.C., USA) for the evaluation of the hemodynamic performance. RESULTS: The site-reported hemodynamic data of stented valves and sutureless valves are stable and comparable during follow-up, showing stable reduction of mean and peak pressure gradients through one-year follow-up (mean: 12.1 ± 6.2 vs. 11.5 ± 4.6 mmHg; peak: 21.3 ± 11.4 vs. 22.0 ± 8.9 mmHg). These results at 1-year are confirmed in the subgroup by the core-lab assessed echocardiogram with an average mean and peak gradient of 12.8 ± 5.7 and 21.5 ± 9.1 mmHg for Su-AVR, and 13.4 ± 7.7 and 23.0 ± 13.0 mmHg for SAVR. The valve effective orifice area was 1.3 ± 0.4 and 1.4 ± 0.4 cm2 at 1-year for Su-AVR and SAVR. These improvements are observed across all valve sizes. At 1-year evaluation, 91.3% (n = 42) of patients in Su-AVR and 82.3% in SAVR (n = 51) groups were free from paravalvular leak (PVL). The rate of mild PVL was 4.3% (n = 2) in Su-AVR and 12.9% (n = 8) in the SAVR group. A similar trend is observed for central leak occurrence in both core-lab assessed echo groups. CONCLUSION: At 1-year of follow-up of a PERSIST-AVR patient sub-group, the study showed comparable hemodynamic performance in the sutureless and the stented-valve groups, confirmed by independent echo core lab. Perceval sutureless prosthesis provides optimal sealing at the annulus with equivalent PVL and central regurgitation extent rates compared to sutured valves. Sutureless valves are therefore a reliable and essential technology within the modern therapeutic possibilities to treat aortic valve disease.

Pacemaker implantation after sutureless or stented valve: results from a controlled randomized trial.

OBJECTIVES: Sutureless aortic valves demonstrated non-inferiority to standard stented valves for major cardiovascular and cerebral events at 1 year after aortic valve replacement. We aim to assess the factors correlating with permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) in both cohorts. METHODS: PERSIST-AVR is a prospective, randomized, open-label trial. Patients undergoing aortic valve replacement were randomized to receive a sutureless aortic valve replacement (Su-AVR) or stented sutured bioprosthesis (SAVR). Multivariable analysis was performed to identify possible independent risk factors associated with PPI. A logistic regression analysis was performed to estimate the risk of PPI associated to different valve size. RESULTS: The 2 groups (Su-AVR; n = 450, SAVR n = 446) were well balanced in terms of preoperative risk factors. Early PPI rates were 10.4% in the Su-AVR group and 3.1% in the SAVR. PPI prevalence correlated with valve size XL (P = 0.0119) and preoperative conduction disturbances (P = 0.0079) in the Su-AVR group. No predictors were found in the SAVR cohort. Logistic regression analysis showed a significantly higher risk for PPI with size XL compared to each individual sutureless valve sizes [odds ratio (OR) 0.272 vs size S (95%confidence interval 0.07-0.95), 0.334 vs size M (95% CI 0,16-0; 68), 0.408 vs size L (95% CI 0,21-0.81)] but equivalent risk of PPI rates for all other combination of valve sizes. CONCLUSIONS: Su-AVR is associated with higher PPI rate as compared to SAVR. However, the increased PPI rate appears to be size-dependent with significant higher rate only for size XL. The combination of preoperative conduction disorder and a size XL can lead to a higher probability of early PPI in Su-AVR. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02673697.

Preservation of the Aortic Root During Type A Aortic Dissection Surgery: An Effective Strategy?

BACKGROUND: Management of the aortic root during acute Type A aortic dissection (TAAD) repair remains controversial in term of long-term evolution and reoperation. The aim of this study was to assess the long-term outcomes of the aortic root after conservative management during primary surgery. METHODS: One hundred sixty-four consecutive patients were included in this monocentric retrospective study. The primary endpoint was reoperation on the aortic root during long-term follow-up. Forty-six patients had aortic root replacement (ARR) and 118 had supracoronary aortic replacement (SCR). The 10-year survival, occurrence of significant aortic regurgitation, and radiologic aortic root dilatation in each group were assessed during follow-up. RESULTS: Patients from ARR group were younger than those from SCR group (p < 0.0001). Median follow-ups of ARR group and SCR group are 4.4 (interquartile range [IR]: 2.6-8.3) and 6.15 (IR: 2.8-10.53) years, respectively. Reoperation of the aortic root during long-term follow-up was similar in both groups (ARR group: 5.1%, SCR group: 3.3%, p = 0.636). The 10-year survivals of ARR and SCR groups were 64.8 ± 12.3% and 46.3 ± 5.8% (p = 0.012), respectively. Long-term significant aortic regurgitation occurred in one patient (1.7%) and seven patients (7.6%) of the ARR and SCR groups (p = 0.176), respectively. Radiologic aortic root diameters in the SCR group were similar between postoperative period and follow-up studies (p = 0.58). Reoperation on the distal aorta (p = 0.012) and patent radiologic false lumen of the descending aorta (p = 0.043) were independent risk factors of late death. CONCLUSION: SCR is an effective technique for primary TAAD surgery and does not increase the rate of late reoperation on the aortic root.

Author's reply (in reference to letter to editor proposed by Etem Caliskan, Catherine J. Pachuk, Louis P. Perrault, Maximilian Y Emmert and entitled: preservation solutions to improve graft patency: The devil is in the detail).

Not applicable.

Cardiopulmonary bypass and internal thoracic artery: Can roller or centrifugal pumps change vascular reactivity of the graft? The IPITA study: A randomized controlled clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) induces a systemic inflammatory response (SIRS) and affects the organ vascular bed. Experimentally, the lack of pulsatility alters myogenic tone of resistance arteries and increases the parietal inflammatory response. The purpose of this study was to compare the vascular reactivity of the internal thoracic arteries (ITAs) due to the inflammatory response between patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) under CPB with a roller pump or with a centrifugal pump. METHODS: Eighty elective male patients undergoing CABG were selected using one or two internal thoracic arteries under CPB with a roller pump (RP group) or centrifugal pump (CFP group). ITA samples were collected before starting CPB (Time 1) and before the last coronary anastomosis during aortic cross clamping (Time 2). The primary endpoint was the endothelium-dependent relaxation of ITAs investigated using wire-myography. The secondary endpoint was the parietal inflammatory response of arteries defined by the measurements of superoxide levels, leukocytes and lymphocytes rate and gene expression of inflammatory proteins using. Terminal complement complex activation (SC5b-9) and neutrophil activation (elastase) analysis were performed on arterial blood at the same times. RESULTS: Exposure time of ITAs to the pump flow was respectively 43.3 minutes in the RP group and 45.7 minutes in the CFP group. Acetylcholine-dependent relaxation was conserved in the two groups whatever the time. Gene expression of C3 and C4a in the artery wall decreased from Time 1 to Time 2. No oxidative stress was observed in the graft. There was no difference between the groups concerning the leukocytes and lymphocytes rate. SC5b-9 and elastase increased between Time 1 and Time 2. CONCLUSION: Endothelium-dependent relaxation of the internal thoracic arteries was preserved during CPB whatever the type of pump used. The inflammatory response observed in the blood was not found in the graft wall within this time frame. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Name of trial study protocol: IPITA Registration number (ClinicalTrials.gov): NCT04168853.

Do storage solutions protect endothelial function of arterialized vein graft in an experimental rat model?

BACKGROUND: This study aims to compare the effects of storage solutions commonly used in coronary artery bypass grafting on the vascular reactivity in vein graft interposed in arterial position in syngeneic rats. METHODS: Twenty-seven male Lewis rats were sacrified to sample a vein graft implanted 6 weeks ago into abdominal aorta position. The vein grafts were inferior venae cavae initially pretreated with heparinized saline solution (HS) or autologous heparinized blood (AHB) or our referent solution, GALA. The endothelial functionality, the in situ Reactive Oxygen Species (ROS) levels and the histological characteristics were conducted from segments of arterialized vein graft. RESULTS: At 6 weeks, graft thrombosis occurred respectively in 22% of AHB group, 62.5% in the HS group and 82.5% in the GALA group. In each group, significative intimal hyperplasia was observed. After 6 weeks, an endothelium-remodeling layer associated with an increase of wall thickness was observed in each group. Endothelium-dependent tone was reduced in the vein graft regardless of the group. No difference was observed concerning the ROS in vein graft between the different groups. In distal aortic sections, ROS levels were increased in HS and GALA groups. CONCLUSIONS: Storage solutions used in this experimental model of vein graft implanted in arterial position cause graft injury and a complete disappearance of vascular reactivity. GALA solution did not reduce intimal risk hyperplasia when the vein graft was exposed to arterial flow in a rat model.

Balloon-Expandable Versus Self-Expanding Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Propensity-Matched Comparison From the FRANCE-TAVI Registry.

BACKGROUND: No randomized study powered to compare balloon expandable (BE) with self expanding (SE) transcatheter heart valves (THVs) on individual end points after transcatheter aortic valve replacement has been conducted to date. METHODS: From January 2013 to December 2015, the FRANCE-TAVI nationwide registry (Registry of Aortic Valve Bioprostheses Established by Catheter) included 12 141 patients undergoing BE-THV (Edwards, n=8038) or SE-THV (Medtronic, n=4103) for treatment of native aortic stenosis. Long term mortality status was available in all patients (median 20 months; interquartile range, 14 to 30). Patients treated with BE-THV (n=3910) were successfully matched 1:1 with 3910 patients treated with SE-THV by using propensity score (25 clinical, anatomical, and procedural variables) and by date of the procedure (within 3 months). The first coprimary outcome was ≥ moderate occurrence of paravalvular regurgitation or in-hospital mortality, or both. The second coprimary outcome was 2-year all-cause mortality. RESULTS: In propensity-matched analyses, the incidence of the first coprimary outcome was higher with SE-THV (19.8%) compared with BE-THV (11.9%; relative risk, 1.68 [95% CI, 1.46-1.91]; P<0.0001). Each component of the outcome was also higher in patients receiving SE-THV: ≥ moderate paravalvular regurgitation (15.5% versus 8.3%; relative risk, 1.90 [95% CI, 1.63-2.22]; P<0.0001) and in hospital mortality (5.6% versus 4.2%; relative risk, 1.34 [95% CI, 1.07-1.66]; P=0.01). During follow up, all cause mortality occurred in 899 patients treated with SE-THV (2-year mortality, 29.8%) and in 801 patients treated with BE-THV (2-year mortality, 26.6%; hazard ratio, 1.17 [95% CI, 1.06-1.29]; P=0.003). Similar results were found using inverse probability of treatment weighting using propensity score analysis. CONCLUSION: The present study suggests that use of SE-THV was associated with a higher risk of paravalvular regurgitation and higher in-hospital and 2-year mortality compared with use of BE-THV. These data strongly support the need for a randomized trial sufficiently powered to compare the latest generation of SE-THV and BE-THV. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01777828.

Outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement without predilation of the aortic valve: Insights from 1544 patients included in the SOURCE 3 registry.

AIMS: To investigate the impact of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) without preliminary balloon aortic valvuloplasty (pre-BAV) on periprocedural outcomes in a large, real-world registry. METHODS AND RESULTS: The SOURCE 3 registry was an observational, multi-center, single-arm study of patients with severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis at high surgical risk treated with the SAPIEN 3 transcatheter heart valve (THV). Procedural and 30-day outcomes were compared between two groups of 772 patients each (retrospectively matched) with or without pre-BAV. All baseline clinical, echocardiographic, and anatomical valve characteristics were comparable between groups except for Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score, which was lower in the direct TAVR group (6.0 ±â€¯5.9 vs 7.8 ±â€¯8.3; p = 0.003). In the direct TAVR group, there were less post-dilatations (8.1% vs. 13.1%, p = 0.002), shorter procedural time (70.9 ±â€¯39.8 min vs 73.0 ±â€¯32.2 min, p = 0.033) and fluoroscopy time (13.4 ±â€¯7.0 min vs 14.9 ±â€¯7.4 min, p < 0.001). Other procedural outcomes and echocardiographic variables at 30 days did not differ significantly between the two groups: safety endpoint (10.4% with pre-BAV vs 13.5% with direct TAVR, p = 0.059), mortality (2.1% vs 2.3%, p = 0.730), disabling strokes (0.4% vs 0.5%, p = 0.704), and moderate to severe paravalvular leak (PVL) (3.2% vs 2.2%, p = 0.40). Unexpectedly, new permanent pacemaker implantation and life-threatening bleeds were less frequently observed with pre-BAV group than with direct TAVR (10.4% vs 13.9%, p = 0.032 and 3.5% vs 6.5%, p = 0.007, respectively). CONCLUSION: In this large TAVR dataset, direct implantation of the SAPIEN 3 THV without pre-BAV was feasible and safe and resulted in shorter procedures, without impact on 30-day prosthesis function and PVL.

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.

One-Year Outcomes of a European Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Cohort According to Surgical Risk.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation is increasingly being used in patients at lower risk for surgery. We aimed to assess the distribution of surgical risk score categories in current clinical practice and their relationship with clinical outcomes and the calibration and discrimination power of both the logistic EuroSCORE (logES) and EuroSCORE II. The SOURCE 3 study is a European prospective registry of patients with severe aortic stenosis treated with the commercially available SAPIEN 3 transcatheter heart valve. METHODS AND RESULTS: Out of 1785 patients, 518 patients (low-surgical risk) had a baseline logES <10%, 691 (intermediate-surgical risk) had a logES 10% to 20%, and only 576 patients (high-surgical risk) had a logES ≥20%. Even if low-risk patients were younger compared with the other groups, the mean age was about 80 years old in each risk category. At 1 year, all-cause mortality was 10.3%, 11.4%, and 17.1% in low-, intermediate-, or high-surgical risk patients, respectively, while cardiac mortality was 5.3%, 7.7%, and 11.4%, respectively. Observed mortality rates were substantially lower than that predicted with logES. The observed/predicted mortality ratio was 0.26 in low-surgical risk patients, 0.08 in intermediate-surgical risk patients, and 0.12 in high-surgical risk patients. Similar observations were obtained with EuroSCORE II. CONCLUSIONS: In this real-world setting, two-thirds of SAPIEN 3 transcatheter heart valve treated transcatheter aortic valve implantation patients had a logES <20 but were still considered appropriate transcatheter aortic valve implantation candidates by the heart team, mainly because of older age and less frequently because of conditions not captured by risk scores. logES and EuroSCORE II had poor discrimination and calibration power in this transcatheter aortic valve implantation cohort. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT02698956.

Temporal Trends in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in France: FRANCE 2 to FRANCE TAVI.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is standard therapy for patients with severe aortic stenosis who are at high surgical risk. However, national data regarding procedural characteristics and clinical outcomes over time are limited. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess nationwide performance trends and clinical outcomes of TAVR during a 6-year period. METHODS: TAVRs performed in 48 centers across France between January 2013 and December 2015 were prospectively included in the FRANCE TAVI (French Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation) registry. Findings were further compared with those reported from the FRANCE 2 (French Aortic National CoreValve and Edwards 2) registry, which captured all TAVRs performed from January 2010 to January 2012 across 34 centers. RESULTS: A total of 12,804 patients from FRANCE TAVI and 4,165 patients from FRANCE 2 were included in this analysis. The median age of patients was 84.6 years, and 49.7% were men. FRANCE TAVI participants were older but at lower surgical risk (median logistic European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation [EuroSCORE]: 15.0% vs. 18.4%; p < 0.001). More than 80% of patients in FRANCE TAVI underwent transfemoral TAVR. Transesophageal echocardiography guidance decreased from 60.7% to 32.3% of cases, whereas more recent procedures were increasingly performed in hybrid operating rooms (15.8% vs. 35.7%). Rates of Valve Academic Research Consortium-defined device success increased from 95.3% in FRANCE 2 to 96.8% in FRANCE TAVI (p < 0.001). In-hospital and 30-day mortality rates were 4.4% and 5.4%, respectively, in FRANCE TAVI compared with 8.2% and 10.1%, respectively, in FRANCE 2 (p < 0.001 for both). Stroke and potentially life-threatening complications, such as annulus rupture or aortic dissection, remained stable over time, whereas rates of cardiac tamponade and pacemaker implantation significantly increased. CONCLUSIONS: The FRANCE TAVI registry provided reassuring data regarding trends in TAVR performance in an all-comers population on a national scale. Nonetheless, given that TAVR indications are likely to expand to patients at lower surgical risk, concerns remain regarding potentially life-threatening complications and pacemaker implantation. (Registry of Aortic Valve Bioprostheses Established by Catheter [FRANCE TAVI]; NCT01777828).

Influence of stentless versus stented valves on ventricular remodeling assessed at 6 months by magnetic resonance imaging and long-term follow-up.

BACKGROUND: To compare the effect of stented versus stentless bioprostheses on left ventricular remodeling and assess their impact on long-term survival. METHODS: From January 2002 to December 2009, 62 severe aortic stenosis patients without coronary artery disease were randomized for bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement. After randomization, a cross-over was possible based on intraoperative data. Ventricular remodeling was studied by cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging six months after surgery. Long-term survival was assessed by telephone survey. RESULTS: Thirty-five patients received a porcine Mosaïc® Medtronic bioprosthesis (Stented Group; Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN, USA) inserted using the usual supra-annular technique and 27 received a porcine Freestyle® Medtronic bioprosthesis (Stentless Group) inserted in the subcoronary position. Mean age was 75±3 and 73±4 years in the stentless and stented group, respectively. Nine patients who should have been implanted with a stentless bioprosthesis received a stented bioprosthesis for anatomical reasons. At 6 months, the left ventricular mass (LVM) decreased significantly in both groups (Stentless Group: 214.6±56.1g and 156.3±23g and Stented Group: 237±75.7g and 181±53.3g, respectively after surgery and at 6 months), this decrease was significantly greater in the stentless group (p=0.026). Reserve and coronary flow were increased in both groups at 6 months. Mean follow-up duration was 6.6±3.0 years and 7.2±4.0 years in the stentless and stented group, respectively. The 5-year actuarial survival was 87.5±11.7% and 82.5±17.1% for the stentless and stented group, respectively (p=0.81). CONCLUSION: Porcine stentless prosthesis results in a better LVM regression than a stented valve at 6 months without changing the long-term survival.

Remote ischemic preconditioning in aortic valve surgery: Results of a randomized controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Although remote ischemic preconditioning (RIPC) has emerged as an attractive strategy to reduce cardiac injury in patients undergoing diverse cardiac surgical procedures, it is unclear whether RIPC has protective effects in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement surgery without coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). METHODS: Hence, 100 adult patients undergoing elective aortic valve replacement for aortic valve stenosis, without combined surgery with CABG, were prospectively randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to either the RIPC group or the control group. The RIPC group underwent three cycles of 5-min inflation to 200mmHg and 5-min deflation of an automated upper-arm cuff inflator after induction of anesthesia. The control group had a deflated cuff placed on upper arm for 30min. The primary endpoint was 72-h area under curve (AUC) for troponin I (cTnI). Secondary endpoints were 72-h AUC for creatine kinase-MB isoenzyme (CK-MB) release, incidence of acute kidney injury, extubation time, length of stay in intensive care unit, and simplified acute physiology score (SAPS II). RESULTS: There were no significant differences in cTnI AUC [195±190 arbitrary units (a.u.) in RIPC group vs. 169±117 a.u. in the control group; p=0.41] and CK-MB AUC between groups. None of the other secondary endpoints differed between groups. Acute kidney injury occurred in 12 patients (24.5%) in the control group and in 13 (26.0%) in the RIPC group (p=0.86). CONCLUSIONS: RIPC did not exhibit significant cardiac or kidney protective effects in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement surgery without CABG.

Endovascular treatment of iatrogenic aortic graft injury after sternal puncture.

We report the case of a 71-year old woman who had previously undergone supra-aortic trunk transposition via a median sternotomy, along with endovascular thoracic aortic stent-graft repair. During the diagnostic sternal puncture for a recently discovered acute lymphoblastic leukaemia, an accidental graft injury occurred. For this patient, who was not a surgical candidate, endovascular treatment with a covered stent (endograft) was performed, with uneventful postoperative follow-up. This case report illustrates the limitations of sternal puncture in patients with a previous sternotomy, and discusses the possibility of endovascular treatment in the event of aortic graft injury, given easy accessibility and favourable aortic neck anatomy.