Hydrodynamic Assessment of Explanted Degenerated Transcatheter Aortic Valves: Novel Insights Into Noncalcific and Calcific Mechanisms.

BACKGROUND: The etiology of transcatheter aortic valve (TAV) degeneration is poorly understood, particularly noncalcific mechanisms. OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to investigate noncalcific and calcific mechanisms of TAV degeneration and evaluate their impact on leaflet function by bench testing, imaging, and histology. METHODS: TAV explants were obtained from the EXPLANT THV registry and clinical institutions. Hydrodynamic assessment was performed using a heart valve pulse duplicator system under physiological conditions. Micro-computed tomography, high-resolution photography, high speed video, and hematoxylin and eosin staining were used to evaluate the morphological appearance, leaflet kinematics, and calcium burden of TAVs. RESULTS: A total of 14 explants were evaluated: 10 self-expanding CoreValve/Evolut TAVs (Medtronic), 3 balloon-expandable SAPIEN 3 TAVs (Edwards Lifesciences), and 1 mechanically expandable Lotus TAV (Boston Scientific). The median patient age at explantation was 73.0 years (Q1-Q3: 64.5-80.0 years), with a time to explantation of 4 years 1 month (1 year 5 months to 4 years 11 months). Six TAV explants were found to have leaflet calcification (162.4 mm3; 58.8-603.0 mm3), and 8 had no calcification detectable by micro-computed tomography and histology. All samples had impaired leaflet kinematics. There was no significant difference in the hydrodynamic mean gradient between calcified (47.2 mm Hg; 26.6-74.1 mm Hg) and noncalcified (27.6 mm Hg; 15.2-36.7 mm Hg; P = 0.28) TAVs. Leaflet calcification had a weak but nonsignificant association with the hydrodynamic mean gradient (r = 0.42; P = 0.14). CONCLUSIONS: TAV function can be severely impacted by noncalcific and calcific mechanisms of tissue degeneration. Importantly, functional stenosis can occur in TAVs in the absence of obvious and significant calcification.

Treatment options for isolated aortic valve insufficiency: a review.

Aortic insufficiency (AI) is a valvular disease with increasing prevalence in older patients. The modern era provides numerous options for the management of AI which is explored here. Traditional interventions included aortic valve replacement with either mechanical or bioprosthetic aortic valves. While the former is known for its durability, it has grown out of favor due to the potential complications of anticoagulation. The preference for bioprosthetic valves is thus on the rise, especially with the advancements of transcatheter technology and the use of valve-in-valve therapy. Surgical options are also no longer limited to replacement but include complex techniques such as those required for aortic valve repair, Ozaki neocuspidization, Ross procedure and valve-sparring aortic root repair. Transcatheter options for the management of AI are not commercially available currently; however, preliminary data from ad-hoc trials, showed promising results and potential use of transcatheter technology in a variety of patients with pure AI.

Contemporary experience of mitral transcatheter edge-to-edge repair technology in patients with mitral annular calcification.

BACKGROUND: Mitral annular calcification (MAC) has been an exclusion for many of the earlier pivotal trials that were instrumental in gaining device approval and indications for mitral transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (M-TEER). AIMS: To evaluate the impact of MAC on the procedural durability and success of newer generation MitraClip® systems (G3 and G4 systems). METHODS: Data were collected from Northwell TEER registry. Patients that underwent M-TEER with third or fourth generation MitraClip device were included. Patients were divided into -MAC (none-mild) and +MAC (moderate-severe) groups. Procedural success was defined as ≤ grade 2 + mitral regurgitation (MR) postprocedure, and durability was defined as ≤ grade 2 + MR retention at 1 month and 1 year. Univariate analysis compared outcomes between groups. RESULTS: Of 260 M-TEER patients, 160 were -MAC and 100 were +MAC. Procedural success was comparable; however, there were three patients who required conversion to cardiac surgery during the index hospitalization in the +MAC group versus none in the -MAC group (though this was not statistically significant). At 1-month follow-up, there were no significant differences in MR severity. At 1-year follow-up, +MAC had higher moderate-severe MR (22.1% vs. 7.5%; p = 0.002) and higher mean transmitral gradients (5.3 vs. 4.0 mmHg; p = 0.001) with no differences in mortality, New York Heart Association functional class or ejection fraction. CONCLUSION: In selective patients with high burden of MAC, contemporary M-TEER is safe, and procedural success is similar to patients with none-mild MAC. However, a loss of procedural durability was seen in +MAC group at 1-year follow-up. Further studies with longer follow-ups are required to assess newer mTEER devices and their potential clinical implications in patients with a high burden of MAC.

The utility and impact of outpatient telemetry monitoring in post-transcatheter aortic valve replacement patients.

BACKGROUND: Conduction disturbances are a common complication of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Mobile Cardiac Telemetry (MCT) allows for continuous monitoring with near "real time" alerts and has allowed for timely detection of conduction abnormalities and pacemaker placement in small trials. A standardized, systematic approach utilizing MCT devices post TAVR has not been widely implemented, leading to variation in use across hospital systems. OBJECTIVES: Our aim was to evaluate the utility of a standardized, systematic approach utilizing routine MCT to facilitate safe and earlier discharge by identifying conduction disturbances requiring permanent pacemaker (PPM) placement. We also sought to assess the occurrence of actionable arrhythmias in post-TAVR patients. METHODS: Using guidance from the JACC Scientific Expert Panel, a protocol was implemented starting in December 2019 to guide PPM placement post-TAVR across our health system. All patients who underwent TAVR from December 2019 to June 2021 across four hospitals within Northwell Health, who did not receive or have a pre-existing PPM received an MCT device at discharge and were monitored for 30 days. Clinical and follow-up data were collected and compared to pre initiative patients. RESULTS: During the initiative 693 patients were monitored with MCT upon discharge, 21 of whom required PPM placement. Eight of these patients had no conduction abnormality on initial or discharge ECG. 59 (8.6 %) patients were found to have new atrial fibrillation or flutter via MCT monitoring. There were no adverse events in the initiative group. Prior to the initiative, 1281 patients underwent TAVR over a one-year period. The initiative group had significantly shorter length of stay than pre-initiative patients (2.5 ± 4.5 vs 3.0 ± 3.8 days, p < 0.001) and lower overall PPM placement rate within 30 days post-TAVR (16 % vs 20.5 %, P = 0.0125). CONCLUSIONS: In our study, implementation of a standardized, systematic approach utilizing MCT in post-TAVR patients was safe and allowed for timely detection of conduction abnormalities requiring pacemaker placement. This strategy also detected new atrial fibrillation and flutter. Reduction in post TAVR pacemaker rate and length of stay were also noted although this effect is multifactorial.

Kissing balloon inflation for transcatheter aortic valve replacement and abutting ostial coronary artery stent.

In patients with ostial coronary stents protruding into the aorta, there is concern for stent injury while undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with balloon-expandable transcatheter heart valve (THV). An 82-year-old male with history of symptomatic aortic stenosis, heart failure, and coronary artery disease with multiple interventions to right coronary artery (RCA) and a history of stent fracture requiring stent-in-stent placement one year previously, was evaluated for TAVR. His ostial RCA stent was protruding into the aorta at the level of sinotubular junction, with ostial stent to aortic wall (SAW) distance of 25.2 mm. There was concern for balloon inflation during TAVR leading to stent injury. The RCA was cannulated with a 6 French JR4 guide and wired with 0.014' coronary wire. Appropriately sized noncompliant balloon was advanced into RCA. Under rapid pacing, the coronary balloon was inflated across the RCA ostium followed by simultaneous deployment of THV. Intravascular imaging of the ostial RCA stent revealed no stent fracture. SAW distance is important to determine the possibility of balloon-induced stent injury during valve deployment. In cases where an ostial stent may interact with balloon inflation, kissing-balloon inflation may be performed to prevent stent injury. Learning objective: In patients with ostial coronary stents protruding into the aorta, stent to aortic wall distance is important to determine the possibility of balloon-induced stent injury during balloon-expandable transcatheter heart valve deployment. Kissing-balloon inflation may be performed to prevent stent injury.

Explant vs Redo-TAVR After Transcatheter Valve Failure: Mid-Term Outcomes From the EXPLANTORREDO-TAVR International Registry.

BACKGROUND: Valve reintervention after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) failure has not been studied in detail. OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to determine outcomes of TAVR surgical explantation (TAVR-explant) vs redo-TAVR because they are largely unknown. METHODS: From May 2009 to February 2022, 396 patients in the international EXPLANTORREDO-TAVR registry underwent TAVR-explant (181, 46.4%) or redo-TAVR (215, 54.3%) for transcatheter heart valve (THV) failure during a separate admission from the initial TAVR. Outcomes were reported at 30 days and 1 year. RESULTS: The incidence of reintervention after THV failure was 0.59% with increasing volume during the study period. Median time from index-TAVR to reintervention was shorter in TAVR-explant vs redo-TAVR (17.6 months [IQR: 5.0-40.7 months] vs 45.7 months [IQR: 10.6-75.6 months]; P < 0.001], respectively. TAVR-explant had more prosthesis-patient mismatch (17.1% vs 0.5%; P < 0.001) as the indication for reintervention, whereas redo-TAVR had more structural valve degeneration (63.7% vs 51.9%; P = 0.023), with a similar incidence of ≥moderate paravalvular leak between groups (28.7% vs 32.8% in redo-TAVR; P = 0.44). There was a similar proportion of balloon-expandable THV failures (39.8% TAVR-explant vs 40.5% redo-TAVR; P = 0.92). Median follow-up was 11.3 (IQR: 1.6-27.1 months) after reintervention. Compared with redo-TAVR, TAVR-explant had higher mortality at 30 days (13.6% vs 3.4%; P < 0.001) and 1 year (32.4% vs 15.4%; P = 0.001), with similar stroke rates between groups. On landmark analysis, mortality was similar between groups after 30 days (P = 0.91). CONCLUSIONS: In this first report of the EXPLANTORREDO-TAVR global registry, TAVR-explant had a shorter median time to reintervention, with less structural valve degeneration, more prosthesis-patient mismatch, and similar paravalvular leak rates compared with redo-TAVR. TAVR-explant had higher mortality at 30 days and 1 year, but similar rates on landmark analysis after 30 days.

Comparison of Periprocedural and Intermediate-Term Outcomes of TAVI in Patients with Ejection Fraction ≤ 20% vs. Patients with 20% < EF ≤ 40.

Treatment of congestive heart failure (CHF) with left ventricular (LV) systolic dysfunction and severe aortic stenosis (AS) is challenging, yet transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has emerged as a suitable treatment option in such patients. We compared the periprocedural outcomes of TAVR in patients with an ejection fraction (EF) of ≤20% (VLEF group) to patients with an EF > 20% to ≤40% (LEF group). We included patients with severe AS and reduced LV ejection fraction (LVEF ≤ 40%) who underwent TAVR at four centers within Northwell Health between January 2016 and December 2020. Over 2000 consecutive patients were analyzed, of which 355 patients met the inclusion criteria. The primary composite endpoint was in-hospital mortality, moderate or greater paravalvular (PVL), stroke, conversion to open surgery, aortic valve re-intervention, and/or need for PPM. Secondary endpoints were length of stay, NYHA classification at 1 month and 1 year, mortality at 1 month and 1 year, mean valve gradient at 1 month, KCCQ score at 1 month, and ≥ moderate PVL at 1 month. There was no difference in the primary composite endpoint between the two groups (23.6% for VLEF vs. 25.3% for LEF, p = 0.29). During TAVR placement, 40% of patients in the VLEF group required ≥1 vasopressors for hypotension lasting ≥30 min vs. only 21% of patients in the LEF group (p < 0.01). Intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) use during procedure was greater in the VLEF group (9% vs. 1%, p < 0.01)-all placed post TAVR. Emergency ECMO use was higher in the VLEF group as well (5% vs. 0%). Total length of stay was significantly different between the two groups as well (6 days vs. 3 days, p < 0.01). Both groups had a change in LVEF of ~10%. One-year outcomes were similar between the groups. All-cause mortality at 1 year was not significantly different at 1 year (13% for VLEF vs. 11% for LEF), and KCC scores were also similar (77.54 vs. 74.97). Mean aortic valve gradients were also similar (12 mmHg vs. 11 mmHg, p = 0.48). Our study suggests that patients with EF ≤ 20% can safely have TAVR with similar periprocedural outcomes compared to patients with EF > 20% to ≤40% despite higher rates of vasopressor and mechanical support.

Utility of Multidetector Computed Tomographic Angiography as an Alternative to Transesophageal Echocardiogram for Preoperative Transcatheter Mitral Valve Repair Planning.

BACKGROUND: Three-dimensional (3D) transesophageal echocardiogram (TEE) is the gold standard for the diagnosis of degenerative mitral regurgitation (dMR) and preoperative planning for transcatheter mitral valve repair (TMVr). TEE is an invasive modality requiring anesthesia and esophageal intubation. The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic has limited the number of elective invasive procedures. Multi-detector computed tomographic angiography (MDCT) provides high-resolution images and 3D reconstructions to assess complex mitral anatomy. We hypothesized that MDCT would reveal similar information to TEE relevant to TMVr, thus deferring the need for a preoperative TEE in certain situations like during a pandemic. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data on patients who underwent or were evaluated for TMVr for dMR with preoperative MDCT and TEE between 2017 and 2019. Two TEE and 2 MDCT readers, blinded to patient outcome, analyzed: leaflet pathology (flail, degenerative, mixed), leaflet location, mitral valve area (MVA), flail width/gap, anterior-posterior (AP) and commissural diameters, posterior leaflet length, leaflet thickness, presence of mitral valve cleft and degree of mitral annular calcification (MAC). RESULTS: A total of 22 (out of 87) patients had preoperative MDCT. MDCT correctly identified the leaflet pathology in 77% (17/22), flail leaflet in 91% (10/11), MAC degree in 91% (10/11) and the dysfunctional leaflet location in 95% (21/22) of patients. There were no differences in the measurements for MVA, flail width, commissural or AP diameter, posterior leaflet length, and leaflet thickness. MDCT overestimated the measurements of flail gap. CONCLUSIONS: For preoperative TMVr planning, MDCT provided similar measurements to TEE in our study.

Short- and Mid-Term Outcomes of Complex and High-Risk Versus Standard Percutaneous Coronary Interventions in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients undergoing TAVR varies and is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. We evaluated the outcomes of complex and high-risk percutaneous coronary interventions (CHIP-PCIs) and TAVR compared with standard PCI and TAVR. Between January 2014 and March 2021, a total of 276 consecutive patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) who underwent TAVR and PCI at 3 centers within Northwell Health were retrospectively reviewed. CHIP-PCI was defined as PCI with one of the following: left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) <30%; left main coronary artery (LMCA)/chronic total occlusion (CTO) intervention; atherectomy; or need for left ventricular (LV) support. One hundred twenty- seven patients (46%) had CHIP-PCI prior to TAVR and 149 patients (54%) had standard PCI. Thirteen percent of CHIP-PCI and 22% of standard PCI cases were done concomitantly with TAVR. CHIP-PCI criteria were met for low EF (19%), LMCA (25%), CTO (3%), LV support (20%), and atherectomy (50%). The types of valves used were similarly divided (49% balloon expandable vs 51% self expanding. Major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular event (MACCE) rate for CHIP-PCI/TAVR was 4.9% at 30 days vs 1.3% for standard PCI/TAVR (P=.09), driven by in-hospital stroke. At 1 year, the rates of MACCE for CHIP-PCI/TAVR remained higher than for standard PCI/TAVR, but was not statistically significant (8.7% vs 4%; P=.06), driven by revascularization. We found no differences between major and/or minor vascular complications. New York Heart Association classification at 1 month was similar (I/II 93% vs 95%; P=.87). Our study suggests that CHIP-PCI can be safely performed in patients with complex CAD and concomitant severe AS.

Comparison of clinical outcomes between use of overexpanding an undersized versus nominal-sized SAPIEN 3 ultra transcatheter heart valve in patients with borderline annulus area.

BACKGROUND: For patients with borderline annulus areas that fall between two valve sizes, overinflating a smaller balloon-expandable transcatheter heart valve (THV) may be preferable to nominal sizing of a larger THV. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the outcomes of nominal preparation versus over-expanding an under-sized SAPIEN 3 Ultra (S3U) transcatheter heart valve (OE-THV) in cases with borderline annuli. METHODS: 958 patients that underwent TAVR with the S3U at four high-volume TAVR centers between January 2017 and December 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. 336 patients were identified as borderline annuli size, of which 146 (44%) received OE-THVs and 190 (56%) received nominal-sized THVs. The primary composite endpoint included: in-hospital mortality, aortic injury, moderate/severe paravalvular leak (PVL), permanent pacemaker implant (PPM), stroke, or conversion to surgery. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were similar except for a larger percentage of females in the OE-THV (53.42% vs. 42.11%, p = 0.04). TAVR with OE-THV resulted a reduction in the primary composite endpoint (13.69% vs. 22.63%, p = 0.04). On subgroup analysis, there was no difference between 20 mm OE-THV versus 23 mm nominal or 23 mm OE-THV versus 26 mm nominal, but there was a reduction in the primary composite endpoint in patients with larger annuli that received a 26 mm OE-THV compared to the 29 mm nominally sized THV (9.7% vs. 27.4%, p = 0.02). At 1 month and 1 year follow-up, there was no significant difference in mortality, PVL rates, NYHA class, and/or KCCQ score. CONCLUSION: Overinflating a smaller-sized S3U THV may be a safer option in comparison to nominal sizing in patients with borderline annular area.

Transcatheter heart valve selection in patients with low ejection fraction and aortic stenosis.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare outcomes of transcatheter heart valve (THV) choice in patients with left ventricular (LV) systolic dysfunction. BACKGROUND: The management congestive heart failure with combined LV systolic dysfunction and severe aortic stenosis (AS) is challenging, yet transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has emerged as a suitable treatment option in such patients. Head-to-head comparisons among the balloon-expandable (BEV) and self-expandable (SEV) THV remain limited in this subgroup of patients. METHODS: In this retrospective study, we included patients with severe AS with LV systolic dysfunction (LVEF ≤40%) who underwent TAVR at four high volume centers. Two thousand and twenty-eight consecutive patients were analyzed, of which 335 patients met inclusion criteria. One hundred fourty-six patients (43%) received a SEV, and 189 patients (57%) received a BEV. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were similar except for a higher proportion of females in the SEV group. The primary composite endpoint of in-hospital mortality, moderate or greater paravalvular (PVL), stroke, conversion to open surgery, aortic valve reintervention, and/or need for permanent pacemaker (PPM) was no different among THV choice. There was more PVL in the SEV group, but higher transaortic gradients in the BEV group. Clinical outcomes and quality of life measures were similar up to 1 year follow-up. CONCLUSION: The choice of THV in patients with severe AS and systolic dysfunction must be weighed on a case-by-case basis.

Minimally Invasive Direct Coronary Artery Bypass: An Evolving Paradigm Over the Past 25 Years.

OBJECTIVE: We have routinely utilized minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) for revascularization of the left anterior descending (LAD) coronary artery. We examined how this procedure has evolved. METHODS: A retrospective review was undertaken of 2,283 consecutive patients who underwent MIDCAB between 1997 and 2021. Patients were divided into 3 groups: group A from 1997 to 2002 (n = 751, 32.9%), group B from 2003 to 2009 (n = 452, 19.8%), and group C from 2009 to 2021 (n = 1,080, 47.3%). Risk profiles and short-term outcomes were analyzed for the entire cohort and for 293 propensity-matched patients drawn from each group. RESULTS: The left internal mammary artery was harvested open in group A but with robotic assistance in group C. Thirty-day mortality was higher in group A versus group C (12 deaths, 1.6% vs 5 deaths, 0.5%, P = 0.044); this difference was negated after propensity matching. Group A had more comorbidities than group C, including peripheral vascular disease (17.7% vs 10.0%, P < 0.001), congestive heart failure (39.6% vs 18.0%, P < 0.001), and a history of stroke (17.9% vs 10.0%, P < 0.001), although diabetes mellitus was more common in group C (51.4% vs 31.0%, P < 0.001). Stroke was greater in group A (1.2% vs 0.0% vs 0.2%, respectively, P = 0.004), as was the need for prolonged ventilation (3.6% vs 0.2% vs 0.9%, respectively, P < 0.001), before and after propensity matching. CONCLUSIONS: MIDCAB patients had less comorbidities than in the past. Robot-assisted MIDCAB was associated with lower stroke risk.

Lifetime management for aortic stenosis: Planning for future therapies.

A shift to lifetime management has gained more focus with the approval of low-risk transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). This paper is therefore focused on the different approaches for lifetime management. Herein we discuss the procedural safety, durability, performance, and future options for each lifetime management strategy. In younger patients that elect to undergo surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR), options for bioprosthetic failure are TAV-in-SAV or redo SAVR. Among patients that undergo TAVR, options for valve failure include TAVR explant with SAVR or TAV-in-TAV. Additionally, there are patients who may require a third valvular intervention. The initial therapy may limit re-intervention options down the road. This review discusses how options for future therapies affect the decision of SAVR vs TAVR in younger patients.

A Novel Computed Tomographic Angiography Tortuosity Index to Predict Successful Sentinel Cerebral Embolic Protection Delivery for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.

Background: Percutaneous transradial placement of the Sentinel cerebral embolic protection device (CEPD) (Boston Scientific) is indicated during transcatheter aortic valve replacement to capture embolic material in patients without excessive tortuosity of the right subclavian/innominate arteries. We aimed to generate a quantitative tortuosity index (TI) from the preoperative computed tomographic angiography (CTA) as an objective measure of tortuosity to determine suitability for CEPD placement. Methods: Eighty-one patients considered for CEPD were included in this study. A centerline of the right subclavian/innominate arteries was generated from preoperative CTA scans. Three-dimensional Cartesian coordinates of landmarks along the centerline were used to calculate curvature. Tortuosity was derived as a change in angulation along each vessel segment. Peak and average TI values were calculated. Results: Sixty-seven patients had CEPD placement attempted. Unsuccessful CEPD placement occurred in 3 of 67 (4.4%) patients. The peak tortuosity for the successful, unsuccessful, and visually tortuous (not attempted) cohorts were 49.66 ± 11.96°/cm, 113.92 ± 5.70°/cm, and 70.44 ± 17.01°/cm, respectively. The peak and average TI of the successful cohort follows a normal distribution. A proposed TI cutoff for safe CEPD was peak tortuosity of 74°/cm and average tortuosity of 30°/cm, 2 standard deviations above the peak and average TI of the successful cohort. All unsuccessful CEPD patients fell outside the boundaries. Half of the visually tortuous patients were within the boundaries but did not have CEPD attempted. Conclusions: A novel TI based on preoperative CTA can assist in selecting patients for transradial CEPD. Our proposed quantitative tool may help to appropriately include and exclude patients for CEPD placement.

Mitral Regurgitation in the High-Risk Patient: Integrating an Expanding Armamentarium of Transcatheter Devices Into the Treatment Algorithm.

Over the last decade, multiple transcatheter mitral valve repair and replacement strategies have emerged, yet there is only 1 US Food and Drug Administration approved device, the MitraClip (Abbott Vascular, Inc., Santa Clara, CA). Current guidelines support the use of the MitraClip in high or prohibitive surgical risk patients, but there are many patients that are not anatomically suited for the device. This review article discusses the approach to degenerative and functional mitral regurgitation in the high-prohibitive risk patient, how to choose transcatheter treatment options (both approved and investigational), and potential management for therapy failure.

Minimally invasive coronary bypass versus percutaneous coronary intervention for isolated complex stenosis of the left anterior descending coronary artery.

OBJECTIVE: Debate continues as to the optimal minimally invasive treatment modality for complex disease of the left anterior descending coronary artery, with advocates for both robotic-assisted minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass and percutaneous coronary intervention with a drug-eluting stent. We analyzed the midterm outcomes of patients with isolated left anterior descending disease, revascularized by minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass or drug-eluting stent percutaneous coronary intervention, focusing on those with complex lesion anatomy. METHODS: A retrospective review was undertaken of all patients who underwent coronary revascularization between January 2008 and December 2016. From this population, 158 propensity-matched pairs of patients were generated from 158 individuals who underwent minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass for isolated complex left anterior descending disease and from 373 patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention using a second-generation drug-eluting stent. Midterm survival and incidence of repeat left anterior descending intervention were analyzed for both patient groups. RESULTS: Overall 9-year survival was not significantly different between patient groups both before and after propensity matching. Midterm mortality in the matched minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass group was low, irrespective of patient risk profile. By contrast, advanced age (hazard ratio, 1.10; P = .012) and obesity (hazard ratio, 1.09; P = .044) predicted increased late death after drug-eluting stent percutaneous coronary intervention among matched patients. Patients who underwent minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass were significantly less likely to require repeat left anterior descending revascularization than those who had percutaneous coronary intervention, both before and after propensity matching. Smaller stent diameter in drug-eluting stent percutaneous coronary intervention was associated with increased left anterior descending reintervention (hazard ratio, 3.53; P = .005). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with complex disease of the left anterior descending artery, both minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass and percutaneous coronary intervention are associated with similar excellent intermediate-term survival, although reintervention requirements are lower after surgery.

Surgical Explantation After TAVR Failure: Mid-Term Outcomes From the EXPLANT-TAVR International Registry.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate clinical characteristics, mechanisms of failure, and outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) explantation. BACKGROUND: Surgical explantation following TAVR may be required for structural valve degeneration, paravalvular leak, infection, or other reasons. However, in-depth data on indications and outcomes are lacking. METHODS: Data from a multicenter, international registry (EXPLANT-TAVR) of patients who underwent TAVR explantation were reviewed retrospectively. Explantations performed during the same admission as initial TAVR were excluded. Clinical and echocardiographic outcomes were evaluated. Median follow-up duration was 6.7 months (interquartile range [IQR]: 1.0-18.8 months) after TAVR explantation and was 97.7% complete at 30 days and 86.1% complete at 1 year. RESULTS: From November 2009 to September 2020, 269 patients across 42 centers with a mean age of 72.7 ± 10.4 years underwent TAVR explantation. About one quarter (25.9%) were deemed low surgical risk at index TAVR, and median Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk at TAVR explantation was 5.6% (IQR: 3.2%-9.6%). The median time to explantation was 11.5 months (IQR: 4.0-32.4 months). Balloon-expandable and self-expanding or mechanically expandable valves accounted for 50.9% and 49.1%, respectively. Indications for explantation included endocarditis (43.1%), structural valve degeneration (20.1%), paravalvular leak (18.2%), and prosthesis-patient mismatch (10.8%). Redo TAVR was not feasible because of unfavorable anatomy in 26.8% of patients. Urgent or emergency cases were performed in 53.1% of patients, aortic root replacement in 13.4%, and 54.6% had concomitant cardiac procedures. Overall survival at last follow-up was 76.1%. In-hospital, 30-day, and 1-year mortality rates were 11.9%, 13.1%, and 28.5%, respectively, and stroke rates were 5.9%, 8.6%, and 18.7%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The EXPLANT-TAVR registry reveals that surgical risks associated with TAVR explantation are not negligible and should be taken into consideration in the lifetime management of aortic stenosis.