Ten years' experience with the sutureless aortic valve replacement: incidence and predictors for survival and valve durability at follow-up.

OBJECTIVES: Aortic valve replacement with a sutureless prosthesis [sutureless aortic valve replacement (Su-AVR)] is an option for patients with severe aortic valve stenosis. However, data regarding long-term outcomes and prosthesis durability are still lacking. METHODS: All consecutive patients who successfully underwent Su-AVR with the Perceval valve in our centre between 2010 and 2020 were included in the analysis and followed prospectively with echocardiography. Risk factor analysis was performed to assess variables associated with worse survival and bioprosthetic valve failure. RESULTS: Study population consisted of 547 patients: the mean age was 76.4 (5.2) years, 51% were female and the mean logistic EuroSCORE was 13% (11). The median survival was 7.76 years [95% confidence interval (CI) = 6.9-8.6]. Risk factor analysis identified age [hazard ratio (HR) 1.06, 95% CI 1.03-1.11; P < 0.001), EuroSCORE II (HR 1.08, 1.02-1.13; P < 0.001), baseline dialysis (HR 2.14, 95% CI 1.4-4.4; P = 0.038) and postoperative acute kidney injury ≥2 (HR 8.97, 95% CI 4.58-17.6; P < 0.001) as factors significantly correlated with worse survival. The reported HRs for age are per 1 year and for EuroSCORE II is 1 percentage point. Structural valve deterioration (SVD) was observed in 23 patients, of whom 19 underwent reintervention (median freedom from SVD 10.3 years). In multivariable Cox analysis, age (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.82-0.95; P < 0.001) was found to be a significant predictor of SVD. Overall, 1.8% was referred for prosthetic valve endocarditis (confirmed or suspected) during follow-up. One patient showed moderate non-SVD and none developed prosthetic valve thrombosis. CONCLUSIONS: The sutureless valve represents a reliable bioprosthesis for aortic valve replacement in patients with a 10-year life expectancy. Younger age at the time of implant is the only factor associated with the risk of long-term SVD.

Risk of conduction disturbances following different transcatheter aortic valve prostheses: the role of aortic valve calcifications.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the impact of prosthesis choice and aortic valve calcifications on the occurrence of conduction disturbances after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the preoperative clinical characteristics, electrocardiograms, contrast-enhanced multidetector computed tomography scans and procedural strategies of patients who underwent TAVI in our center between January 2012 and June 2017. Quantification of calcium volume was performed for each aortic cusp above (aortic valve) and below (left ventricular outflow tract, LVOT) the basal plane. Multivariate analysis was performed to evaluate risk factors for the onset of new bundle branch block (BBB), transient and permanent atrioventricular block (tAVB, pAVB). RESULTS: A total of 569 patients were included in the study. Six different prostheses were implanted (Edwards Sapien XT, n = 162; Edwards Sapien 3, n = 240; Medtronic CoreValve, n = 27; Medtronic CoreValve Evolut R, n = 21; Symetis Acurate, n = 56; Symetis Acurate neo, n = 63). The logistic regression analysis for BBB showed association with baseline left anterior hemiblock. The logistic regression for tAVB, found the prior valvuloplasty and the balloon post-dilatation associated with the outcome. Baseline left and right BBB, degree of oversizing, and LVOT calcification beneath the non-coronary cusp were associated with pAVB. Neither the prosthesis model, nor the use of a self-expandable prosthesis showed statistical significance with the above-mentioned outcomes on univariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: LVOT calcification beneath the non-coronary cusp, baseline left anterior hemiblock, right BBB, balloon post-dilatation, prior valvuloplasty and oversizing are independently associated with postprocedural conduction disturbances after TAVI. Use of a self-expandable prosthesis may show a lower incidence of AVB, if applied in lower calcified aortic valves.

Redo aortic valve replacement for prosthesis endocarditis in patients previously classified as high or prohibitive risk: a narrative review.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and sutureless aortic valve replacement (Su-AVR) enabled in the last years many patients at high or prohibitive risk to be treated for their severe symptomatic aortic valve stenosis. As often happens in medicine, new techniques bring not only new hopes, but also new problems. In recent years, alongside the lengthening of the life of these patients treated with TAVI or Su-AVR, cardiologists and cardiac surgeons have had to face the long-term complications associated with the implantation of these devices, such as the prosthetic infective endocarditis. The correct management of prosthesis valve endocarditis after TAVI or Su-AVR in high risk patients, and the possible role of surgery are a matter of debate because pushing the limits of the modern medicine and becoming a new challenge for cardiac surgeons of 21st century. In this review, we summarized the incidence, characteristics and evidences for this new and controversial problem of the cardiovascular community. Moreover, we investigated the outcomes reported in literature of the conservative and the surgical strategy. Although the reported mortality rate of surgical treatment is high, seems not prohibitive, mostly if compared to conservative medical therapy. The collaborative exchange between cardiologist, cardiac surgeons, clinical microbiologists and expert of imaging is mandatory to face this challenge.

Risk factors for atrioventricular block after transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a single-centre analysis including assessment of aortic calcifications and follow-up.

AIMS: To assess the contribution of aortic valve calcification to the occurrence of transient or permanent atrioventricular block (AVB) and the need for permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in a large single-centre cohort. METHODS AND RESULTS: We retrospectively analysed pre-operative contrast-enhanced multidetector computed tomography scans of patients who underwent TAVI in our centre between 2012 and 2016. Calcium volume was calculated for each aortic cusp above (aortic valve), and below [left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT)] the basal plane. Clinical and procedural data as well as pre-operative electrocardiograms were evaluated. Multivariate analysis was performed to evaluate risk factors for transient and permanent AVB. A total of 342 patients receiving a balloon-expandable prosthesis were included in the study. Overall incidence of transient and permanent AVB was 4% (n = 14) and 7.6% (n = 26), respectively. On logistic regression analysis, baseline right bundle branch block [odds ratio (OR) 7.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.6-20.6; P < 0.01], degree of oversizing (OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.01-1.07 P = 0.02), prior percutaneous coronary intervention (OR 2.8, 95% CI 1.1-7.3), and LVOT calcification beneath the non-coronary cusp (OR for an increase of 10 mm3 = 1.06, 95% CI 1-1.1; P = 0.03) were found to be independently associated with permanent AVB and PPI, whereas calcification of LVOT beneath the right coronary cusp (OR for an increase of 10 mm3 = 1.16, 95% CI 1.02-1.3; P = 0.02) and balloon post-dilation (OR 3.8, 95% CI 1.2-11.8; P = 0.02) were associated with reversible AVB. CONCLUSION: Left ventricular outflow tract calcifications are associated with transient and non-reversible AVB after TAVI, and its evaluation could help in predicting onset and reversibility of AVB.

The Perceval S aortic valve has the potential of shortening surgical time: does it also result in improved outcome?

BACKGROUND: Sutureless aortic valve prostheses have the potential of shortening surgical time. However, whether shorter operative times may also result in improved patient outcomes remains to be established. METHODS: One hundred patients underwent minimally invasive isolated aortic valve replacement. Of these, 50 patients received a Perceval (Sorin Group, Saluggia, Italy) bioprosthesis (group P) and 50 patients received a non-Perceval valve (group NP). RESULTS: The group P patients were older (77.5 ± 5.3 versus 71.7 ± 10 years, p = 0.001) and at higher risk (logistic European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation [EuroSCORE] 9.9 ± 6.5 versus 4.3 ± 1, p = 0.001) than group NP patients. One implant failure occurred in group P (p = 0.5), and conversion to full sternotomy was necessary in 1 patient from each group. Aortic cross-clamp and cardiopulmonary bypass times were 39.4% and 34% shorter in group P (both p < 0.001). Within 30 days, a total of 5 patients died (2 in group P and 3 in group NP, p = 0.5). No significant differences were observed between groups in postoperative arrhythmias and need for pacemaker implantation (p = 0.3 and p = 0.5, respectively). Despite the higher surgical risk, group P patients less frequently required blood transfusion (1.1 ± 1.1 units versus 2.3 ± 2.8 units, p = 0.007), and had a shorter intensive care unit stay (1.9 ± 0.7 versus 2.8 ± 1.9 days, p = 0.002) and a shorter intubation time (9.2 ± 3.6 hours versus 15 ± 13.8 hours, p = 0.01). Group NP patients had a mean prosthesis size significantly smaller than for group P (23 ± 2 mm versus 23.9 ± 1.1 mm, p = 0.01). The Perceval valve provided comparable hemodynamic performance to that of non-Perceval valves (mean gradient 8.4 ± 6 mm Hg versus 10 ± 4.9 mm Hg, p = 0.24). CONCLUSIONS: Sutureless implantation of the Perceval valve is associated with shorter cross-clamp and cardiopulmonary bypass times, resulting in improved clinical outcome. In addition, it compares favorably with conventional valves in terms of mortality and outcome variables.