Patient-Reported Postoperative Neuropsychological Deterioration After Heart Valve Replacement and Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting.

Background: Postoperative cognitive decline (POCD) after cardiosurgical interventions are well described through objective psychometric tests. However, a patient's subjective perception is essential to clinical assessment and quality of life. This study systematically evaluated patient-reported POCD between subjects undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting and heart valve replacement. Methods: This study was a multicentre, prospective questionnaire survey conducted at the cardiac surgery departments at the Kerckhoff Clinic in Bad Nauheim and the University Hospital in Giessen, Germany. We included patients undergoing elective coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), aortic valve replacement (AVR), mitral valve replacement or reconstruction (MVR), and combined surgery (CABG + valve replacement [VR]) with extracorporeal circulation. The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, the Cognitive Failures Questionnaire (CFQ) for Self-assessment (CFQ-S), and the external assessment (CFQ-foreign [F]) were completed preoperatively, as well as at 3 and 12 months postoperatively. Results: A total of 491 patients were available for analyses (CABG = 182, AVR = 134, MVR = 93, CABG + VR = 82). POCD and postoperative depression increase (PODI) were observed for each surgical procedure. (At the 3-month follow-up: CFQ-S [CABG = 7.1%, AVR = 3.7%, MVR = 9.7%, CABG + VR = 9.8%]; CFQ-F [CABG = 9.9%, AVR = 9.7%, MVR = 9.7%, CABG + VR = 15.9%]; PODI [CABG = 7.7%, AVR = 9.7%, MVR = 6.5%, CABG + VR = 8.5%]. At the 12-month follow-up: CFQ-S [CABG = 6.6%, AVR = 7.5%, MVR = 15.1%, CABG + VR = 7.3%]; CFQ-F [CABG = 7.1%, AVR = 14.9%, MVR = 10.8%, CABG + VR = 9.8%]; PODI [CABG = 10.4%, AVR = 11.2%, MVR = 6.5%, CABG + VR = 4.9%]). No significant between-group effects were observed for the CFQ-S, CFQ-F, or the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Conclusions: For clinicians, paying attention to patients' self-reported experiences of reduced cognitive function and symptoms of depression following cardiac surgery is important. Such reporting is an indication that interventions such as cognitive training or psychotherapy should be considered.

Contexte: Le déclin cognitif postopératoire (DCPO) à la suite d'interventions de chirurgie cardiaque est bien décrit par des évaluations psychométriques objectives. Cependant, la perception subjective du patient est essentielle à l'évaluation clinique et à la qualité de vie. Cette étude visait à évaluer de façon systématique le DCPO déclaré par le patient chez des sujets ayant subi un pontage aortocoronarien ou une chirurgie valvulaire. Méthodologie: Cette étude prospective multicentrique par questionnaire a été menée aux services de chirurgie cardiaque de la clinique Kerckhoff de Bad Nauheim et de l'hôpital universitaire de Giessen, en Allemagne. Elle a porté sur des patients ayant subi un pontage aortocoronarien (PAC), un remplacement valvulaire aortique (RVA), un remplacement ou une reconstruction de la valvule mitrale (RVM) ou une chirurgie combinée (PAC et remplacement valvulaire [RV]) avec circulation extracorporelle, en situation non urgente. L'échelle d'évaluation de l'anxiété et de la dépression à l'hôpital (HADS), le questionnaire d'auto-évaluation des déficits cognitifs (CFQ-S) et le questionnaire d'évaluation externe des déficits cognitifs (CFQ-F) ont été remplis avant l'intervention chirurgicale, ainsi que 3 et 12 mois après la chirurgie. Résultats: Au total, les résultats de 491 patients étaient disponibles aux fins d'analyses (PAC = 182, RVA = 134, RVM = 93, PAC et RV = 82). Des cas de DCPO et une augmentation postopératoire des symptômes de dépression (APOD) ont été observés après chacune des interventions chirurgicales. (Lors du suivi après 3 mois : DCPO selon le CFQ-S [PAC = 7,1 %, RVA = 3,7 %, RVM = 9,7 %, PAC + RV = 9,8 %]; DCPO selon le CFQ-F [PAC = 9,9 %, RVA = 9,7 %, RVM = 9,7 %, PAC + RV = 15,9 %]; APOD [PAC = 7,7 %, RVA = 9,7 %, RVM = 6,5 %, PAC + RV = 8,5 %]. Lors du suivi après 12 mois : DCPO selon le CFQ-S [PAC = 6,6 %, RVA = 7,5 %, RVM = 15,1 %, PAC + RV = 7,3 %]; DCPO selon le CFQ-F [PAC= 7,1 %, RVA = 14,9 %, RVM = 10,8 %, PAC+ RV = 9,8 %]; APOD [PAC = 10,4 %, RVA = 11,2 %, RVM = 6,5 %, PAC + RV = 4,9 %]). Aucun effet intergroupe significatif n'a été observé relativement aux questionnaires CFQ-S et CFQ-F ou à l'échelle HADS. Conclusions: Il est important que les cliniciens portent attention aux déclarations des patients en ce qui concerne la diminution des fonctions cognitives et les symptômes de dépression à la suite d'une chirurgie cardiaque. De telles déclarations sont une indication que des interventions comme l'entraînement cognitif ou la psychothérapie doivent être envisagées.

[Catheter-based and surgical treatment for aortic valve diseases]. / Katheterbasierte und operative Therapie bei Aortenvitien.

The pathophysiology of aortic valve diseases is of predominantly degenerative nature, characterized by calcific aortic valve stenosis, which is associated with a reduction in prognosis. The prevalence of aortic valve insufficiency also increases with advancing age. Timely causal treatment is crucial in the management of aortic valve diseases. Following the indication for intervention, the heart team plays a central role in evaluating the results and making therapeutic decisions that consider the patient's preferences. In the assessment of treatment options, considerations regarding the long-term perspective are particularly crucial, especially in younger patients. The most common therapeutic approach for aortic valve diseases is the introduction of a new valve prosthesis. In the majority of cases, this is now achieved through catheter-based implantation of a bioprosthetic heart valve, known as transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Open surgical aortic valve replacement (AVR) is favored in younger patients with low surgical risk or in the case that TAVI is not feasible. In AVR, both biological and the longest-lasting mechanical prosthesis types are used. Surgical repair techniques are primarily applied in cases of aortic valve regurgitation. Notably, TAVI, as well as surgical procedures for the treatment of aortic valve diseases, have undergone significant advancements in recent years, including expanded indications for TAVI and, on the surgical side, in particular the development of minimally invasive surgical techniques.

Transcatheter or Surgical Treatment of Aortic-Valve Stenosis.

BACKGROUND: Among low-risk patients with severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis who are eligible for both transcatheter aortic-valve implantation (TAVI) and surgical aortic-valve replacement (SAVR), data are lacking on the appropriate treatment strategy in routine clinical practice. METHODS: In this randomized noninferiority trial conducted at 38 sites in Germany, we assigned patients with severe aortic stenosis who were at low or intermediate surgical risk to undergo either TAVI or SAVR. Percutaneous- and surgical-valve prostheses were selected according to operator discretion. The primary outcome was a composite of death from any cause or fatal or nonfatal stroke at 1 year. RESULTS: A total of 1414 patients underwent randomization (701 to the TAVI group and 713 to the SAVR group). The mean (±SD) age of the patients was 74±4 years; 57% were men, and the median Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk score was 1.8% (low surgical risk). The Kaplan-Meier estimate of the primary outcome at 1 year was 5.4% in the TAVI group and 10.0% in the SAVR group (hazard ratio for death or stroke, 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.35 to 0.79; P<0.001 for noninferiority). The incidence of death from any cause was 2.6% in the TAVI group and 6.2% in the SAVR group (hazard ratio, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.24 to 0.73); the incidence of stroke was 2.9% and 4.7%, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.35 to 1.06). Procedural complications occurred in 1.5% and 1.0% of patients in the TAVI and SAVR groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with severe aortic stenosis at low or intermediate surgical risk, TAVI was noninferior to SAVR with respect to death from any cause or stroke at 1 year. (Funded by the German Center for Cardiovascular Research and the German Heart Foundation; DEDICATE-DZHK6 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03112980.).

ACURATE neo2 Versus SAPIEN 3 Ultra Transcatheter Heart Valve in Severe Aortic Valve Calcification: A Propensity-Matched Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Comparative data on transcatheter self-expanding ACURATE neo2 (NEO2) and balloon-expandable SAPIEN 3 Ultra prostheses in technically challenging anatomy of severe aortic valve calcified aortic annuli are scarce. METHODS: A total of 1987 patients with severe native aortic stenosis treated with the self-expanding NEO2 (n=1457) or balloon-expandable SAPIEN 3 Ultra (n=530) from January 2017 to April 2023 were evaluated. The primary end point was procedural outcome according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium 3 definitions. Propensity matching defined 219 pairs with severe calcification (calcium density cutoff, 758 AU/cm2) of the native aortic valve. RESULTS: Technical success (90.4% versus 91.8%; risk difference, 1.4% [95% CI, -4.4 to -7.2]; P=0.737) and device success at 30 days (80.8% versus 75.8%; risk difference, -5.0% [95% CI, -13.2 to 3.1]; P=0.246) were comparable between NEO2 and SAPIEN 3 Ultra. The rate of severe prosthesis-patient mismatch (1.1% versus 10.1%; risk difference, 10.0% [95% CI, 4.0-13.9]; P<0.001) and mean transvalvular gradient ≥20 mm Hg (2.8% versus 14.3%; risk difference, 11.5% [95% CI, 5.8-17.1]; P<0.001) was lower with NEO2. The rate of more-than-mild paravalvular leakage or valve-in-valve due to paravalvular leakage was significantly higher (6.2% versus 0.0%; risk difference, 6.2% [95% CI, -10.1 to -2.7]; P=0.002), and there was a tendency for a higher rate of device embolization or migration (1.8% versus 0.0%; risk difference, -1.8% [95% CI, -4.1 to 0.4]; P=0.123) with NEO2. Multivarate regression revealed no independent impact of transcatheter heart valve selection on device success (odds ratio, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.48-1.77]; P=0.817). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with severely calcified annuli, supraannular implantation of NEO2 showed hemodynamic advantages. Nevertheless, NEO2 was associated with a higher incidence of relevant paravalvular leakage and a numerically higher rate of device embolization than SAPIEN 3 Ultra in this particular patient group.

Outcomes after surgical revascularization in diabetic patients.

OBJECTIVES: Patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) have been repeatedly demonstrated to have worse clinical outcomes compared to patients without DM. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of DM on 1-year clinical outcomes after isolated CABG. METHODS: The European DuraGraft registry included 1130 patients (44.6%) with and 1402 (55.4%) patients without DM undergoing isolated CABG. Intra-operatively, all free venous and arterial grafts were treated with an endothelial damage inhibitor. Primary end point in this analysis was the incidence of a major adverse cardiac event (MACE), a composite of all-cause death, repeat revascularization or myocardial infarction at 1 year post-CABG. To balance between differences in baseline characteristics (n = 1072 patients in each group), propensity score matching was used. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression was performed to identify independent predictors of MACE. RESULTS: Diabetic patients had a higher cardiovascular risk profile and EuroSCORE II with overall more comorbidities. Patients were comparable in regard to surgical techniques and completeness of revascularization. At 1 year, diabetics had a higher MACE rate {7.9% vs 5.5%, hazard ratio (HR) 1.43 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.05-1.95], P = 0.02}, driven by increased rates of death [5.6% vs 3.5%, HR 1.61 (95% CI 1.10-2.36), P = 0.01] and myocardial infarction [2.8% vs 1.4%, HR 1.99 (95% CI 1.12-3.53) P = 0.02]. Following propensity matching, no statistically significant difference was found for MACE [7.1% vs 5.7%, HR 1.23 (95% CI 0.87-1.74) P = 0.23] or its components. Age, critical operative state, extracardiac arteriopathy, ejection fraction ≤50% and left main disease but not DM were identified as independent predictors for MACE. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, 1-year outcomes in diabetics undergoing isolated CABG were comparable to patients without DM.

Infection remediation after septic device extractions: analysis of three treatment strategies including a 1-year follow-up.

Introduction: In CIED infections, all device material needs to be removed. But, especially in pacemaker-dependent patients it is often not possible to realize a device-free interval for infection remediation. In those patients, different treatment options are available, however the ideal solution needs still to be defined. Methods: This retrospective analysis includes 190 patients undergoing CIED extractions due to infection. Three different treatment algorithms were analyzed: Group 1 included 89 patients with system removal only (System removal group). In Group 2, 28 patients received an epicardial electrode during extraction procedure (Epicardial lead group) while 78 patients in group 3 (contralateral reimplantation group) received implantation of a new system contralaterally during extraction procedure. We analyzed peri- and postoperative data as well as 1-year outcomes of the three groups. Results: Patients in the system removal and epicardial lead groups were significantly older, had more comorbidities, and suffered more frequently from systemic infections than those in contralateral reimplantation group. Lead extraction procedures had comparable success rates: 95.5%, 96.4%, and 93.2% of complete lead removal in the System removal, Epicardial Lead, Contralateral re-implantation group respectively. Device reimplantation was performed in all patients in Epicardial lead and Contralateral reimplantation group, whereas only 49.4% in System removal group received device re-implantation. At 1-year follow-up, freedom from infection and absence of pocket irritation were comparable for all groups (94.7% Contralateral reimplantation group and Epicardial lead group, 100% System removal group). No procedure-related mortality was observed, whereas 1-year mortality was 3.4% in System removal group, 4.1% in Contralateral re-implantation group and 21.4% in Epicardial lead group (p < 0.001). Conclusion: In patients with CIED infection, systems should be removed completely and reimplanted after infection remediation. In pacemaker-dependent patients, simultaneous contralateral CIED re-implantation or epicardial lead placement may be performed, depending on route, severity and location of infection.