Search

Background: In recent years, the use of transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation in the mitral position (TMVI) for the treatment of mitral valve pathology following ring or bioprosthetic implantation has emerged as a less invasive option in comparison to repeated mitral valve surgery (RMVS). We aimed to compare the early and mid-term results of these two strategies. Method: We retrospectively analyzed all patients who underwent a mitral intervention in our institution between 2005 and 2022. Applying the exclusion criteria, 41 subjects were analyzed: 23 underwent RMVS, while 18 underwent a TMVI. The time-dependency treatment effect was approached using a landmark analysis, applying the Kaplan–Meier analysis at different time points. Results: The two study groups were comparable in terms of age (p = 0.18), gender (p = 0.78), body surface area (p = 0.33), and EuroSCORE II (p = 0.06). No patients died perioperatively or had a stroke. Two patients in each group died within the first 30 days following the procedure (RMVS 8.3% vs. TMVI 11.1%; p = 0.75). Eighteen patients had died at follow-up; two underwent re-intervention on their mitral valve (one in each group). The mean survival was not statistically different between groups (RMVS 8 ± 1.1 years, 95% CI 5.8–10.2, vs. TMVI 4.79 ± 0.82 years, 95% CI 3.1–6.4; log-rank = 0.087). A landmark analysis of survival after four years showed significantly worse survival for patients in the TMVI group in comparison with those treated surgically (log-rank = 0.047). Conclusions: TMVI and RMVS are both effective strategies with similar short-term outcomes. However, patients in the TMVI group showed a significantly lower survival rate after four years. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The transfemoral (TF) approach is the most common route in TAVI, but it is still associated with a risk of bleeding and vascular complications. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes between surgical cut-down (SC) and percutaneous (PC) approach. (2) Methods: Between January 2018 and June 2022, 774 patients underwent a transfemoral TAVI procedure. After propensity matching, 323 patients underwent TAVI in each group. (3) Results: In the matched population, 15 patients (4.6%) in the SC group vs. 34 patients in the PC group (11%) experienced minor vascular complications (p = 0.02), while no difference for major vascular complication (1.5% vs. 1.9%) were reported. The rate of minor bleeding events was higher in the percutaneous group (11% vs. 3.1%, p <.001). The SC group experienced a higher rate of non-vascular-related access complications (minor 8% vs. 1.2%; major 2.2% vs. 1.2%; p < 0.001). (4) Conclusions: SC for TF-TAVI did not alter the mortality rate at 30 days and was associated with reduced minor vascular complication and bleeding. PC showed a lower rate of non-vascular-related access complications and a lower length of stay. The specific approach should be tailored to the patient's clinical characteristics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: An unexplained condition that follows transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is platelet count reduction (PR). According to published research, patients with balloon-expandable valves (BEVs) had a greater PR than those with self-expandable valves (SEVs). Objectives: The purpose of this study was to investigate the incidence and clinical effects of PR following TAVI. Methods: In total, 1.122 adult TAVI patients were enrolled. Propensity score matching was carried out in a 1:1 ratio between patients with BEVs and those with SEVs. The analysis included changes in platelet count, in-hospital mortality, and early postoperative adverse events. Results: Notably, 632 patients were matched (BEV:316; SEV:316). All patients' post-procedural platelet counts changed according to a parabolic curve, using a mixed regression model for repeated analyses (estimate = −0.931; standard error = 0.421; p = 0.027). The platelet count varied comparably in patients with BEVs and SEVs (estimate = −4.276, standard error = 4.760, p = 0.369). The average time for obtaining the nadir platelet count value was three days after implantation (BEV: 146 (108–181) vs. SEV: 149 (120–186); p = 0.142). Overall, 14.6% of patients (92/632) had post-procedural platelet count <100,000/µL. There was no difference between the two prosthesis types (BEV:51/316; SEV:41/316; p = 0.266). Thrombocytopenia was found to be significantly linked to blood product transfusions, lengthier stays in the intensive care unit and hospital, and in-hospital mortality. Conclusions: TAVI, irrespective of the type of implanted valve, is linked to a significant but temporary PR. Thrombocytopenia increases the risk of serious complications and in-hospital death in TAVI patients. To explore and clarify the causes and associated effects, further prospective research is necessary. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Open in new tab Download slide OBJECTIVES In the last decades, 4 different scores for the prediction of mortality following surgery for type A acute aortic dissection (TAAD) were proposed. We aimed to validate these scores in a large external multicentre cohort. METHODS We retrospectively analysed patients who underwent surgery for TAAD between 2000 and 2020. Patients were enrolled from 10 centres from 2 European countries. Outcomes were the early (30-day and/or in-hospital) and 1-year mortality. Discrimination, calibration and observed/expected (O/E) ratio were evaluated. RESULTS A total of 1895 patients (31.7% females, mean age 63.72 ± 12.8 years) were included in the study. Thirty-day mortality and in-hospital mortality were 21.7% (n  = 412) and 22.5% (n  = 427) respectively. The German Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection Type A (GERAADA) score shows to have the best discrimination [area under the curve (AUC) 0.671 and 0.672] in predicting as well the early and the 1-year mortality, followed by the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD) model 1 (AUC 0.658 and 0.672), the Centofanti (AUC 0.645 and 0.66) and the UK aortic score (AUC 0.549 and 0.563). According to Hosmer–Lemeshow and Brier tests, the IRAD model I and GERAADA, respectively, were well calibrated for the early mortality, while the GERAADA and Centofanti for the 1-year mortality. The O/E analysis showed a marked underestimation for patients labelled as low-risk for UK aortic score and IRAD model I for both outcomes. CONCLUSIONS The GERAADA score showed the best performance in comparison with other scores. However, none of them achieved together a fair discrimination and a good calibration for predicting either the early or the 1-year mortality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives The aim of this study was to investigate the need for postoperative permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) following sutureless and rapid-deployment aortic valve replacement (SuRD-AVR) in the context of a progress report from a large multicenter international registry (SURD-IR). Methods We retrospectively analyzed 4,166 patients who underwent SuRD-AVR between 2008 and 2019. The primary outcome was the need for PPI before discharge. The study population was analyzed separately according to the implanted prostheses (Su cohort and RD cohort). Each cohort was divided into two groups based on the operation date: an early group ("EG" = 2008–2016) and a late group ("LG" = 2017–2019). Results The rate of PPI decreased significantly in the Su cohort over time (EG = 10.8% vs LG = 6.3%, p < 0.001). In the Su cohort, a decrease in age, risk profile, and incidence of bicuspid aortic valve, increased use of anterior right thoracotomy, reduction of cardiopulmonary bypass time and of associated procedures, and more frequent use of smaller prostheses were observed over time. In the RD cohort, the rate of PPI was stable over time (EG = 8.8% vs LG = 9.3%, p = 0.8). In this cohort, a younger age, lower risk profile, and higher incidence of concomitant septal myectomy were observed over time. Conclusion Our analysis showed a significant decrease in the PPI rate in patients who underwent Su-AVR over time. Patient selection as well as surgical improvements and a more accurate sizing could be correlated with this phenomenon. The RD cohort revealed no significant differences either in patient's characteristics or in PPI rate between the two time periods. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Recent trials showed that TAVI is neither inferior nor superior to surgical aortic valve replacement. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of Sutureless and Rapid Deployment Valves (SuRD-AVR) when compared to TAVI in low surgical risk patients with isolated aortic stenosis. Methods: Data from five European Centers were retrospectively collected. We included 1306 consecutive patients at low surgical risk (EUROSCORE II < 4) who underwent aortic valve replacement by means of SuRD-AVR (n = 636) or TAVI (n = 670) from 2014 to 2019. A 1:1 nearest-neighbor propensity-score was performed, and two balanced groups of 346 patients each were obtained. The primary endpoints of the study were: 30-day mortality and 5-year overall survival. The secondary endpoint was 5-year survival freedom from major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs). Results: Thirty-day mortality was similar between the two groups (SuRD-AVR:1.7%, TAVI:2.0%, p = 0.779), while the TAVI group showed a significantly lower 5-year overall survival and survival freedom from MACCEs (5-year matched overall survival: SuRD-AVR: 78.5%, TAVI: 62.9%, p = 0.039; 5-year matched freedom from MACCEs: SuRD-AVR: 64.6%, TAVI: 48.7%, p = 0.004). The incidence of postoperative permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) and paravalvular leak grade ≥ 2 (PVL) were higher in the TAVI group. Multivariate Cox Regression analysis identified PPI as an independent predictor for mortality. Conclusions: TAVI patients had a significantly lower five-year survival and survival freedom from MACCEs with a higher rate of PPI and PVL ≥ 2 when compared to SuRD-AVR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Open in new tab Download slide 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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Open in new tab Download slide OBJECTIVES Sutureless aortic valves demonstrated non-inferiority to standard stented valves for major cardiovascular and cerebral events at 1 year after aortic valve replacement. We aim to assess the factors correlating with permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) in both cohorts. METHODS PERSIST-AVR is a prospective, randomized, open-label trial. Patients undergoing aortic valve replacement were randomized to receive a sutureless aortic valve replacement (Su-AVR) or stented sutured bioprosthesis (SAVR). Multivariable analysis was performed to identify possible independent risk factors associated with PPI. A logistic regression analysis was performed to estimate the risk of PPI associated to different valve size. RESULTS The 2 groups (Su-AVR; n = 450, SAVR n = 446) were well balanced in terms of preoperative risk factors. Early PPI rates were 10.4% in the Su-AVR group and 3.1% in the SAVR. PPI prevalence correlated with valve size XL (P = 0.0119) and preoperative conduction disturbances (P = 0.0079) in the Su-AVR group. No predictors were found in the SAVR cohort. Logistic regression analysis showed a significantly higher risk for PPI with size XL compared to each individual sutureless valve sizes [odds ratio (OR) 0.272 vs size S (95%confidence interval 0.07–0.95), 0.334 vs size M (95% CI 0,16–0; 68), 0.408 vs size L (95% CI 0,21–0.81)] but equivalent risk of PPI rates for all other combination of valve sizes. CONCLUSIONS Su-AVR is associated with higher PPI rate as compared to SAVR. However, the increased PPI rate appears to be size-dependent with significant higher rate only for size XL. The combination of preoperative conduction disorder and a size XL can lead to a higher probability of early PPI in Su-AVR. Clinical trial registration number NCT02673697. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]