Valve Replacement in Patients with Carcinoid Heart Disease: Choosing the Right Valve at the Right Time.

BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY: The prosthetic valve of choice in patients with carcinoid valve disease (CVD) remains controversial due to the limited life expectancy of patients with advanced-stage neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) on the one hand, and concerns regarding structural valve deterioration (SVD) on the other hand. METHODS: The records of 17 patients (11 females, seven males; mean age 65 ± 11 years; undergoing 18 operations) with primarily right heart failure due to CVD were reviewed. All patients received somatostatin analogs perioperatively. Hospital and follow up data (acquired via direct patient contact and echocardiography) collected included baseline characteristics, procedural details, and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: The primary NET site was the ileum (n = 11), lungs (n = 2) and stomach, colon and appendix (n = 1 each). In one patient the primary tumor location could not be identified. Preoperative urinary levels of 5-hydroxyindole acetic acid (5-HIAA; 61 ± 36 mg/24 h) and serum levels of chromogranin A (2926 ± 4057 ng/ml) were 10- and 50-fold greater than normal, respectively. A total of 23 valves was implanted: five tricuspid valve replacements (TVR; four tissue and one mechanical), TVR and pulmonary valve replacements (PVR; three tissue and one mechanical), and TVR and mitral valve replacements (MVR; one tissue and two mechanical). The 30-day mortality was 11% (n = 2). No patient experienced a carcinoid crisis. The mean follow up was 24 ± 21 months (range: 4-85 months). Four patients (receiving seven valves) developed SVD at 12, 14, 15, and 20 months after surgery, and all of these patients died. The actuarial four-year survival and freedom from SVD were 23 ± 14% and 43 ± 15%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The data acquired suggested that the main advantage of tissue valve prostheses, namely to avoid lifelong, intense anticoagulation, might be offset by accelerated SVD. The use of mechanical valves should be considered in CVD patients with a large primary tumor mass and persistent high urinary levels of 5-HIAA, and who are unresponsive to therapy.

Minimally invasive surgery for left ventricular assist device implantation is safe and associated with a decreased risk of right ventricular failure.

BACKGROUND: Right ventricular failure (RVF) after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation is associated with significant mortality and morbidity. The objective of this study was to determine pre- and postoperative risk factors associated with the occurrence of RVF after LVAD implantation. METHODS: This retrospective study included 68 patients who received LVADs between 2010 and 2018 either for bridge to transplant (40 patients, 58.8%) or bridge to destination therapy (28 patients, 41.2%). RVF after LVAD implantation was defined according to the INTERMACS classification. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of RVF. The secondary endpoints were hospital mortality and morbidity and long-term survival. RESULTS: The majority of patients (61.8%) had an INTERMACS profile 1 (36.8%) or 2 (25.0%). The LVAD was implanted either by sternotomy (37 patients, 54.4%) or thoracotomy (31 patients, 45.6%). RVF after LVAD implantation was observed in 32 patients (47.1%). In univariate analysis, an elevated serum glutamic oxaloacetic transaminase (SGOT) (P=0.028) and a high preoperative vasoactive inotropic score (VIS) (P=0.028) were significantly associated with an increased risk of RVF, whereas the implantation of LVAD through a thoracotomy approach was associated with a significant reduction in this risk (P=0.006). The multivariate analysis demonstrated that only the thoracotomy approach was significantly associated with decreased risk of RVF (odds ratio =0.33, 95% confidence interval: 0.17-0.96; P=0.042). Hospital mortality was 53.1% and 5.6% in the RVF and control groups, respectively (P<0.0001). The incidence of stroke and postoperative acute renal failure were significantly increased in the RVF group compared with the control group. The survival after LVAD implantation was 33.5%±9.0% and 85.4%±6.0% at 1 year in the RVF and control groups, respectively (P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: LVAD implantation by thoracotomy significantly reduced the risk of postoperative RVF. This surgical approach should, therefore, be favored.