Demographics and outcomes of patients younger than 75 years undergoing aortic valve interventions in Rotterdam.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is considered a safe and effective alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for elderly patients across the operative risk spectrum. In the Netherlands, TAVI is reimbursed only for patients with a high operative risk. Despite this, one fifth of TAVI patients are < 75 years of age. We aim to compare patient characteristics and outcomes of TAVI and SAVR patients < 75 years. METHODS: This study included all patients < 75 years without active endocarditis undergoing TAVI or SAVR for severe aortic stenosis, mixed aortic valve disease or degenerated aortic bioprosthesis between 2015 and 2020 at the Erasmus University Medical Centre. Dutch authority guidelines were used to classify operative risk. RESULTS: TAVI was performed in 292 patients, SAVR in 386 patients. Based on the Dutch risk algorithm, 59.6% of TAVI patients and 19.4% of SAVR patients were at high operative risk. There was no difference in 30-day all-cause mortality between TAVI and SAVR (2.4% vs 0.8%, p = 0.083). One-year and 5­year mortality was higher after TAVI than after SAVR (1-year: 12.5% vs 4.3%, p < 0.001; 5­year: 36.8% vs 12.0%, p < 0.001). Within risk categories we found no difference between treatment strategies. Independent predictors of mortality were cardiovascular comorbidities (left ventricular ejection fraction < 30%, atrial fibrillation, pulmonary hypertension) and the presence of malignancies, liver cirrhosis or immunomodulatory drug use. CONCLUSION: At the Erasmus University Medical Centre, in patients < 75 years, TAVI is selected for higher-risk phenotypes and overall has higher long-term mortality than SAVR. We found no evidence for worse outcome within risk categories.

Pectus Excavatum and Risk of Right Ventricular Failure in Left Ventricular Assist Device Patients.

Background: Right ventricular failure (RVF) is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with a left ventricular assist device (LVAD). This study is aimed to investigate the influence of a pectus excavatum on early and late outcomes, specifically RVF, following LVAD implantation. Methods: A retrospective study was performed, that included patients with a HeartMate 3 LVAD at our tertiary referral center. The Haller index (HI) was calculated using computed tomography (CT) scan to evaluate the chest-wall dimensions. Results: In total, 80 patients (median age 57 years) were included. Two cohorts were identified: 28 patients (35%) with a normal chest wall (HI < 2.0) and 52 patients (65%) with pectus excavatum (HI 2.0-3.2), with a mean follow-up time of 28 months. Early ( ≤ 30 days) RVF and early acute kidney injury events did not differ between cohorts. Overall survival did not differ between cohorts with a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.47 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.19-1.19, p = 0.113). Late ( > 30 days) recurrent readmission for RVF occurred more often in patients with pectus excavatum (p = 0.008). The onset of late RVF started around 18 months after implantation and increased thereafter in the overall study cohort. Conclusions: Pectus excavatum is observed frequently in patients with a LVAD implantation. These patients have an increased rate of readmissions and late RVF. Further investigation is required to explore the extent and severity of chest-wall abnormalities on the risk of RVF.

Aortic arch branching variations and risk of cerebrovascular accidents in patients with a left ventricular assist device.

AIMS: This retrospective study investigated the association between anatomical variations in the aortic arch branching and adverse events, including the risk of cerebrovascular accidents (CVAs), in patients with a left ventricular assist device (LVAD). METHODS: Medical charts were reviewed for all patients with HeartMate 3 LVAD support at our center from 2016 to 2021. Computed tomography scans were evaluated to categorize the variations in the aortic arch branching based on seven different types, as described in the literature. RESULTS: In total, 101 patients were included: 86 (85.1%) with a normal branching pattern and 15 (14.9%) with an anatomical variation. The following variations were observed: eight (7.9%) with a bovine arch and seven (6.9%) with a left vertebral arch. The median age was 57 years, 77.2% were men, and the median follow-up was 25 months. No difference was found in the rate of early (< 30 days) re-exploration due to bleeding after LVAD implantation. The rate of CVA and mortality did not differ significantly between patients with a normal arch or an anatomical variation during follow-up, with hazard ratios of 1.47 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.48-4.48; P = 0.495] and 0.69 (95% CI: 0.24-1.98; P = 0.489), respectively. CONCLUSION: This preliminary study showed no differences in early and long-term adverse events, including CVA, when comparing patients with a variation in the aortic arch branching to patients with a normal aortic arch. However, knowledge of the variations in aortic arch branching could be meaningful during cardiac surgery for potential differences in surgical events in the perioperative period.

Influence of the Outflow Graft Angular Position on the Outcomes in Patients With a Left Ventricular Assist Device.

This study aimed to explore the potential impact of the angular position of the outflow graft on thromboembolic events and aortic valve regurgitation in people with a left ventricular assist device (LVAD). We analyzed contrast computed tomography (CT) data of patients with LVAD implantation between 2016 and 2021. Three-dimensional reconstructions of the outflow graft and aortic arch were performed to calculate the horizontal (azimuth) angle and vertical (polar) angle, as well as the relative distance between the outflow graft, aortic valve, and brachiocephalic artery. Among 59 patients (median age 57, 68% male), a vertical angle ≥107° correlated significantly with increased cerebrovascular accidents (hazard ratio [HR]: 5.8, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.3-26.3, p = 0.022) and gastrointestinal bleeding (HR: 3.4, 95% CI: 1.0-11.2, p = 0.049) during a median 25 month follow-up. No significant differences were found between the vertical angle and aortic valve regurgitation or survival. The horizontal angle and relative distance did not show differences regarding clinical adverse events. This study emphasizes the importance of the LVAD outflow graft angular position to prevent life-threatening thromboembolic events. This study suggests the need for prospective research to further validate these findings.

The proprotein convertase FURIN is a novel aneurysm predisposition gene impairing TGF-ß signaling.

AIM: Aortic aneurysms (AA) frequently involve dysregulation of transforming growth factor ß (TGF-ß)-signaling in the aorta. Here, FURIN was tested as aneurysm predisposition gene given its role as proprotein convertase in pro-TGF-ß maturation. METHODS AND RESULTS: Rare FURIN variants were detected by whole-exome sequencing of 781 unrelated aortic aneurysm patients and affected relatives. Thirteen rare heterozygous FURIN variants occurred in 3.7% (29) unrelated index AA patients, of which 72% had multiple aneurysms or a dissection.FURIN maturation and activity of these variants were decreased in vitro. Patient-derived fibroblasts showed decreased pro-TGF-ß processing, phosphorylation of downstream effector SMAD2 and kinases ERK1/2, and steady-state mRNA levels of the TGF-ß-responsive ACTA2 gene. In aortic tissue, collagen and fibrillin fibers were affected. One variant (R745Q), observed in 10 unrelated cases, affected TGF-ß signaling variably, indicating effect modification by individual genetic backgrounds. CONCLUSION: FURIN is a novel, frequent genetic predisposition for abdominal-, thoracic-, and multiple aortic or middle sized artery aneurysms in older patients, by affecting intracellular TGF-ß signaling, depending on individual genetic backgrounds.

Male-Female Differences in Acute Type B Aortic Dissection.

BACKGROUND: Acute type B aortic dissection is a cardiovascular emergency with considerable mortality and morbidity risk. Male-female differences have been observed in cardiovascular disease; however, literature on type B aortic dissection is scarce. METHODS AND RESULTS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted including all consecutive patients with acute type B aortic dissection between 2007 and 2017 in 4 tertiary hospitals using patient files and questionnaires for late morbidity. In total, 384 patients were included with a follow-up of 6.1 (range, 0.02-14.8) years, of which 41% (n=156) were female. Women presented at an older age than men (67 [interquartile range (IQR), 57-73] versus 62 [IQR, 52-71]; P=0.015). Prior abdominal aortic aneurysm (6% versus 15%; P=0.009), distally extending dissections (71 versus 85%; P=0.001), and clinical malperfusion (18% versus 32%; P=0.002) were less frequently observed in women. Absolute maximal descending aortic diameters were smaller in women (36 [IQR: 33-40] mm versus 39 [IQR, 36-43] mm; P<0.001), while indexed for body surface area diameters were larger in women (20 [IQR, 18-23] mm/m2 versus 19 [IQR, 17-21] mm/m2). No male-female differences were found in treatment choice; however, indications for invasive treatment were different (P<0.001). Early mortality rate was 9.6% in women and 11.8% in men (P=0.60). The 5-year survival was 83% (95% CI, 77-89) for women and 84% (95% CI, 79-89) for men (P=0.90). No male-female differences were observed in late (re)interventions. CONCLUSIONS: No male-female differences were found in management, early or late death, and morbidity in patients presenting with acute type B aortic dissection, despite distinct clinical profiles at presentation. More details on the impact of age and type of intervention are warranted in future studies.