Treating the patients in the 'grey-zone' with aortic valve disease: a comparison among conventional surgery, sutureless valves and transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

OBJECTIVES: Although the use of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has recently become an attractive strategy in extremely high-risk patients undergoing aortic valve replacement (AVR), the most appropriate treatment option in patients with an intermediate- to high-risk profile with conventional surgery (sAVR), TAVR or novel options, such as sutureless valves, has been widely debated. METHODS: One hundred and sixty-three consecutive patients with intermediate to high risk were prospectively enrolled and selected to undergo sAVR (Group 1: G1, n = 55), sutureless valve implantation (Group 2: G2, n = 53) or TAVR (Group 3: G3, n = 55) following a multidisciplinary evaluation including frailty, anatomy and degree of atherosclerotic disease of the aorta/peripheral vessels. The mean logistic EuroSCORE (G1 = 21.3 ± 12.7 vs G2 = 16 ± 11.7 vs G3 = 20.4 ± 12.7, P = 0.06) and preoperative demographics, such as age, gender and left ventricular ejection fraction, were similar: of note, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease was more frequent in TAVI patients (G1 = 27.2% vs G2 = 15.1% vs G3 = 47%; P <0.01). The Perceval S sutureless valve was used in Group 2, whereas TAVR was performed with a Corevalve prosthesis. RESULTS: Post-procedural pacemaker implantation (G1 = 1.8% vs G2 = 2% vs G3 = 25.5%, P <0.001) and peripheral vascular complications (G1 = 0% vs G2 = 0% vs G3 = 14.5%, P <0.001) occurred more frequently in patients undergoing TAVR. Hospital mortality was similar among the groups (G1 = 0% vs G2 = 0% vs G3 = 1.8%, P = NS). At the 24-month follow-up, overall survival free from major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events and prosthetic regurgitation was better in patients who had undergone sAVR and sutureless valves than those who had undergone TAVR (G1 = 95.2 ± 3.3% vs G2 = 91.6 ± 3.8% vs G3 = 70.5 ± 7.6%; P = 0.015). CONCLUSIONS: This preliminary study suggests that the use of TAVR in patients with an intermediate- to high-risk profile is associated with a higher rate of perioperative complications and decreased survival at the 24-month follow-up compared with the use of conventional surgery or sutureless valves.

Endoscopic vessel harvesting: good or bad?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The use of less invasive approaches for saphenous vein or radial artery procurement in CABG surgery has gained popularity during the past decade. The purpose of the present review is to focus on the safety and the potential advantages of minimally invasive conduit harvesting in coronary surgery. RECENT FINDINGS: There is ample evidence in literature that the use of a less invasive approach for conduit (either saphenous vein or radial artery) procurement could yield consistent advantages over the conventional approach, in particular with respect to a lower incidence of wound complications, pain reduction and improved cosmetic results. Nevertheless, some recent studies raised concerns in terms of potential damage occurring to the harvested conduits with the endoscopic approach, which could therefore jeopardize the longevity of the graft itself. SUMMARY: Endoscopic conduit harvesting is a well-tolerated and effective procedure. The majority of scientific reports depicted that the minimally invasive approach does not compromise the quality of the harvested conduits and therefore does not lead to a higher incidence of graft failure or cardiac-related events in the mid-long term. The endoscopic technique should be the approach of choice for saphenous vein and radial artery procurement in CABG surgery; recent technical and technological advancements could further improve outcomes.

Hybrid revascularization in multivessel coronary artery disease.

OBJECTIVES: Minimally invasive hybrid revascularization (MIHR) by means of the left mammary artery on the left anterior descending artery [minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB)] combined with percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) stenting may be an alternative to conventional coronary artery bypass grafting through sternotomy or multiple PCI. The purpose of this study is to retrospectively evaluate the long-term outcomes of this strategy. METHODS: Since May 1997 up to January 2011, 810 MIDCAB have been performed as isolated revascularization in 644 patients. Since 2004, MIDCAB, as a part of hybrid revascularization, was associated with PCI in 166 patients. RESULTS: In the MIDCAB group, mean age was 64.6 ± 12.0, with 83.8% males. Two-vessel disease was 62.4%, three-vessel disease 37.6%. Overall mortality was 0.24%, perioperative acute myocardial infarction-1.6%, early reoperation-0.74%, reopening for bleeding-1.2%, case rate of haemotrasfusion-3.1%, with a mean hospital postoperative stay of 4 ± 2.5 days. Postoperative angiographic control prior to PCI and in symptomatic patients showed patent left internal mammary artery in 100% of cases. PCI was performed in 166 patients, 64.2% before MIDCAB and 35.8% after surgery (interval 2.2 ± 1.3 months). The mean follow-up in the MIDCAB group was 8.4 ± 3.2 years. In the MIHR group, at the mean follow-up of 4.5 ± 2.3 years, freedom from related cardiac death was 93% with freedom from cardiac reintervention of 83%. CONCLUSIONS: Our 13-year experience with MIDCAB demonstrates that the operation is safe and associated with a very low incidence of early and late complications. The hybrid approach provided excellent long-term outcome in terms of freedom from cardiac death and reoperation. Accurate patient selection, as well the timing of the hybrid procedure, is mandatory to optimize surgical and PCI results.