Benefits of physical training on exercise capacity, inspiratory muscle function, and quality of life in patients with ventricular assist devices long-term postimplantation.

BACKGROUND: Capacity to exercise may not be fully restored in patients with heart failure even in the long term after ventricular assist device (VAD) implantation. The benefits of exercise training in patients with VAD are unknown. DESIGN AND METHODS: Fifteen patients, aged 38.3 ± 15.9 years, bridged to heart transplantation with left ventricular assist device or biventricular assist device were randomized at a ratio of 2 : 1 to a training group (TG, n = 10) or a control group (n = 5), 6.3 ± 4 months after implantation. Both the groups were advised to walk 30­45 min/day. TG also underwent moderate-intensity aerobic exercise using a bike or treadmill for 45 min, three to five times a week, combined with high-intensity inspiratory muscle training using a computer-designed software to respiratory exhaustion, two to three times a week for 10 weeks. The patients were tested using cardiopulmonary exercise testing, 6-min walk test, spirometry and electronic pressure manometer for inspiratory muscle strength (Pimax) and endurance (sustained Pimax) measurement. Quality of life was assessed with the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure questionnaire. RESULTS: TG improved peak oxygen consumption (19.3 ± 4.5 vs. 16.8 ± 3.7 ml/kg per min, P = 0.008) and VO2 at ventilatory threshold (15.1 ± 4.2 vs. 12 ± 5.6 ml/kg per min, P = 0.01), whereas the ventilation/carbon dioxide slope decreased (35.9 ± 5.6 vs. 40 ± 6.5, P = 0.009). The 6-min walk test distance increased (527 ± 76 vs. 462 ± 88 m, P = 0.005) and quality of life was improved (38.2 ± 11.6 vs. 48.9 ± 12.8, P = 0.005), as well as Pimax (131.8 ± 33 vs. 95.5 ± 28cmH2O, P = 0.005), sustained Pimax (484 ± 195 vs. 340 ± 193cmH2O/s/103, P = 0.005), and inspiratory lung capacity (2.4 ± 0.9 vs. 1.7 ± 0.7 L, P = 0.008) were improved. No significant changes were noted in the control group. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate that exercise training may improve the functional status of VAD recipients even at a later period after implantation and thus, may have additional importance in cases of destination therapy.

Long-Term Outcomes and Valve Performance in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is an established method for treating patients with aortic valve stenosis. We sought to determine the long-term clinical outcomes and performance of a self-expanding bioprosthesis beyond 5 years. Consecutive patients scheduled for TAVI were included in the analysis. Primary end points were all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, structural valve deterioration (SVD) and bioprosthetic valve failure (BVF), based on the VARC-2 criteria and consensus statement by ESC/EAPCI. The study prospectively evaluated 273 patients (80.61 ± 7.00 years old, 47% females) who underwent TAVI with CoreValve/Evolut-R (Medtronic Inc.). The median follow-up duration was 5 years (interquartile range: 2.9 to 6; longest: 8 years). At 1, 5, and 8 years, estimated survival rates were 89.0%, 61.1%, and 56.0%, respectively, while cardiovascular mortality was 8% at the end of follow-up. Regarding valve performance, 5% of patients had early BVF and 1% had late BVF. Concerning SVD, 16 patients (6% of the total population) had moderate SVD (91% had an increase in mean gradient), with no severe SVD cases. Five patients with SVD died during follow-up. Actual analysis of the 8-year cumulative incidence of function of moderate SVD was 5.9% (2.5% to 16.2%). At multivariate analysis, the factor that emerged as an independent predictor for future SVD, was smaller bioprosthetic valve size (HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.82, p = 0.002). Long-term evaluation beyond 5 years after TAVI with a self-expanding bioprosthesis demonstrated low rates of cardiovascular mortality and structural valve deterioration. Valve size was an independent predictor for SVD.

Pre-Dilatation Versus No Pre-Dilatation for Implantation of a Self-Expanding Valve in All Comers Undergoing TAVR: The DIRECT Trial.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the implantation of a self-expanding valve with or without balloon aortic valvuloplasty (BAV) in an open-label, noninferiority, randomized trial. BACKGROUND: There are no randomized studies comparing the implantation of a self-expanding valve with (pre-BAV) or without BAV. METHODS: Consecutive patients with severe aortic stenosis were randomly assigned to undergo transcatheter aortic valve replacement with the use of self-expanding prostheses with (pre-BAV) or without (no-BAV) pre-dilatation. The primary endpoint was device success according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium 2 criteria. Secondary endpoints included periprocedural mortality and stroke, new permanent pacemaker implantation, vascular complications, and 1-year mortality. The trial was scheduled to show noninferiority (Δ = 15%) of the direct versus the pre-BAV approach. RESULTS: A total of 171 patients were randomized at 4 centers. Of these, 86 underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement with pre-dilatation and 85 without. Device success was noninferior in the no-BAV group compared with the pre-BAV group (65 of 85 [76.5%] for no-BAV vs. 64 of 86 [74.4%] for pre-BAV; mean difference 2.1%; 90% confidence interval: -8.9% to 13%). In the no-BAV group, 25 patients (29.4%) underwent post-balloon dilatation, and in the pre-BAV group, 13 patients (15.1%) underwent post-balloon dilatation (p = 0.03). Regarding major vascular complications and permanent pacemaker implantation, there was no difference between the 2 groups (log-rank p = 0.49, log-rank p = 0.54). In 1-month completed follow-up for all patients, there was 1 periprocedural stroke (0.5%), without any deaths. CONCLUSIONS: Direct, without balloon pre-dilatation, transcatheter aortic valve replacement with a self-expanding prosthesis system is noninferior to the pre-dilatation procedure. Lower post-dilatation rates were encountered in the group with pre-dilatation. (The Predilatation in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Trial [DIRECT]; NCT02448927).

Sirolimus-eluting coronary stents in small vessels.

BACKGROUND: This prospective multicenter study compared angiographic in-lesion late lumen loss in de novo native coronary artery lesions (vessel diameter range 2.25-2.75 mm, length range > or = 15 to < or = 30 mm) 8 months after the implantation of a sirolimus-eluting stent with that of similar vessels with the same drug-eluting stent or a bare stent of the SIRIUS study (historical controls). METHODS AND RESULTS: One hundred one patients (study group) were matched and compared with 323 patients receiving the bare stent (bare control group) and with 350 receiving the Cypher stent (Cypher control group) in the SIRIUS trial. Mean in-lesion late loss in the study group was lower than that in the bare control group (0.20 versus 0.76 mm, P < .0001) and not inferior to that in the Cypher control group (0.27 mm, P = .3). Adverse event rates (death and myocardial infarction) were similar between groups. At 8 months, target lesion revascularization rates were 0% in the study group, 13.2% in the bare control group (P < .001), and 4.6% in the Cypher control group (P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: The Cypher Bx Velocity stent was confirmed to be superior to the bare Bx Velocity stent in small coronary vessels in terms of in-lesion late loss 8 months after implantation.

Intravascular Ultrasonic Imaging of Coronary Arterial Remodeling in Heart Transplant Recipients.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate long-term changes of transplant coronary arteries, including vessel, plaque, and lumen areas. There are limited long-term data on vessel remodeling after heart transplantation. We analyzed serial intravascular ultrasound images of the left anterior descending coronary artery (LAD) in 54 heart transplantation recipients. Nine patients (16.7%) had a history of rejection. Proximal left anterior descending artery segments were matched among time points, a ≥20-mm long segment was analyzed every 1 mm, and results were normalized for analysis length and reported as mm(3)/mm. During follow-up, vessel area decreased (-0.48 ± 1.3 mm(3)/mm/year), and plaque area did not change (-0.01 ± 0.47 mm(3)/mm/year). As a result, lumen area decreased (-0.52 ± 1.34 mm(3)/mm/year). The change in mean lumen area was well correlated to the change in mean vessel area (r = 0.94, p <0.01) but not to the change in mean plaque area (r = -0.27, p = 0.05). In conclusion, lumen loss occurred during long-term follow-up of patients who underwent heart transplantation, primarily secondary to negative remodeling (decrease in vessel dimensions).

Benefits of combined aerobic/resistance/inspiratory training in patients with chronic heart failure. A complete exercise model? A prospective randomised study.

BACKGROUND: We hypothesised that combined aerobic training (AT) with resistance training (RT) and inspiratory muscle training (IMT) could result in additional benefits over AT alone in patients with chronic heart failure (CHF). METHODS: Twenty-seven patients, age 58 ± 9 years, NYHA II/III and LVEF 29 ± 7% were randomly assigned to a 12-week AT (n=14) or a combined AT/RT/IMT (ARIS) (n=13) exercise program. AT consisted of bike exercise at 70-80% of max heart rate. ARIS training consisted of AT with RT of the quadriceps at 50% of 1 repetition maximum (1RM) and upper limb exercises using dumbbells of 1-2 kg as well as IMT at 60% of sustained maximal inspiratory pressure (SPI(max)). At baseline and after intervention patients underwent cardiopulmonary exercise testing, echocardiography, evaluation of dyspnea, muscle function and quality of life (QoL) scores. RESULTS: The ARIS program as compared to AT alone, resulted in additional improvement in quadriceps muscle strength (1RM, p=0.005) and endurance (50%1 RM × number of max repetitions, p=0.01), SPI(max) (p<0.001), exercise time (p=0.01), circulatory power (peak oxygen consumption × peak systolic blood pressure, p=0.05), dyspnea (p=0.03) and QoL (p=0.03). CONCLUSIONS: ARIS training was safe and resulted in incremental benefits in both peripheral and respiratory muscle weakness, cardiopulmonary function and QoL compared to that of AT. The present findings may add a new prospective to cardiac rehabilitation programs of heart failure patients whilst the clinical significance of these outcomes need to be addressed in larger randomised studies.

Sirolimus-eluting coronary stents in small vessels

Background This prospective multicenter study compared angiographic in-lesion late lumen loss in de novo native coronary artery lesions (vessel diameter range 2.25-2.75 mm, length range z15 to V30 mm) 8 months after the implantation of a sirolimus-eluting stent with that of similar vessels with the same drug-eluting stent or a bare stent of the SIRIUS study (historical controls). Methods and Results One hundred one patients (study group) were matched and compared with 323 patients receiving the bare stent (bare control group) and with 350 receiving the Cypher stent (Cypher control group) in the SIRIUS trial. Mean in-lesion late loss in the study group was lower than that in the bare control group (0.20 versus 0.76 mm, P b .0001) and not inferior to that in the Cypher control group (0.27 mm, P = .3). Adverse event rates (death and myocardial infarction) were similar between groups. At 8 months, target lesion revascularization rates were 0% in the study group, 13.2% in the bare control group ( P b .001), and 4.6% in the Cypher control group ( P = .03). Conclusions The Cypher Bx Velocity stent was confirmed to be superior to the bare Bx Velocity stent in small coronary vessels in terms of in-lesion late loss 8 months after implantation. (Am Heart J 2006;151:1019.e121019.e7.) Rates of angiographic restenosis and target lesion revascularization (TLR) were found to be higher in small vessels (b2.5 mm in diameter) than in larger vessels 6 months after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty or stenting1,2 and 1 year after stenting.3 Predictors of small vessel restenosis are diabetes, complex lesions, and long lesions.1,4,5 Although estenosis has not been conclusively linked to mortality, it can adversely affect quality of life.6 tents reduce restenosis by preventing recoil, but tissue growth renarrows the lumen significantly in approximately 20% of patients.7-12 Small vessel stenting has shown some advantages over balloon angioplasty randomized and nonrandomized trials but a higher risk for restenosis as compared with larger vessels.13-17 In recent years, stents eluting sirolimus or taxol have attenuated vascular hyperproliferation.18-25 Sirolimus prevents neointimal proliferation.26,27 The Cypher (sirolimus-eluting Bx Velocity) stent was compared with the bare Bx Velocity stent in the SIRIUS study...

Randomized comparison of primary stenting and provisional balloon angioplasty guided by flow velocity measurement

Background—Coronary stenting improves outcomes compared with balloon angioplasty, but it is costly and may haveother disadvantages. Limiting stent use to patients with a suboptimal result after angioplasty (provisional angioplasty) may be as effective and less expensive.Methods and Results—To analyze the cost-effectiveness of provisional angioplasty, patients scheduled for single-vessel angioplasty were first randomized to receive primary stenting (97 patients) or balloon angioplasty guided by Doppler flow velocity and angiography (523 patients). Patients in the latter group were further randomized after optimization to either additional stenting or termination of the procedure to further investigate what is “optimal.” An optimal result wasdefined as a flow reserve 2.5 and a diameter tenosis 36%. Bailout stenting was needed in 129 patients (25%) who were randomized to balloon angioplasty, and an optimal result was obtained in 184 of the 523 patients (35%). There was no significant difference in event-free survival at 1 year between primary stenting (86.6%) and provisional angioplasty (85.6%). Costs after 1 year were significantly higher for provisional angioplasty (EUR 6573 versus EUR 5885; (P50.014). Results after the second randomization showed that stenting was also more effective after optimal balloon angioplasty (1-year event free survival, 93.5% versus 84.1%; P50.066). Conclusions—After 1 year of follow-up, provisional angioplasty was more expensive and without clinical benefit. The beneficial value of stenting is not limited to patients with a suboptimal result after balloon angioplasty.