Search

BACKGROUND: SAPIEN3 (S3) is a ubiquitous redo-transcatheter aortic valve (TAV) replacement alternative for degenerated Evolut valves, but S3 sizing for S3-in-Evolut remains unclear. We sought to compare the impact of in vivo computed tomography (CT)-sizing on redo-TAV feasibility for S3-in-Evolut with traditional bench-sizing. METHODS: CT scans of 290 patients treated using Evolut R/PRO/PRO+ between July 2015 and December 2021 were analyzed. S3-in-Evolut was simulated using S3 outflow/neoskirt plane (NSP) at node-6, -5, and -4. CT-sizing for S3 was determined by averaging 4 areas of the Evolut stent frame at NSP level and 3 nodes below. Redo-TAV was deemed feasible if the NSP was below the coronaries, or the narrowest valve (virtual S3)-to-aorta distance was >4 mm. Risk of prosthesis-patient mismatch was estimated using predicted indexed-effective orifice area. RESULTS: Compared with bench-sizing, CT-sizing yielded smaller S3 size in 82% at node-6, 81% at node-5, and 84% at node-4. Factors associated with CT-sizing less than bench-sizing were larger index Evolut size, underexpansion of index Evolut, and shallower implant depth (all P<0.05). CT-sizing increased redo-TAV feasibility by +8% at node-6, +10% at node-5, and +4% at node-4. Redo-TAV feasibility increased with annulus size, sinotubular junction dimensions, coronary heights, index Evolut size, deeper Evolut implant depth, and lower NSP levels (all P<0.05). CT-sizing had a slightly higher estimated risk of severe prosthesis-patient mismatch (9% at node-6, 7% at node-5, and 6% at node-4), which could be mitigated by changing the NSP. CONCLUSIONS: CT-sizing for S3-in-Evolut is associated with higher feasibility of redo-TAV compared with bench-sizing, potentially reducing the risk of excessive oversizing and S3 underexpansion. Further validation using real-world clinical data is necessary. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Consensus-driven criteria have recently been proposed for prediction of mitral transcatheter edge-to-edge repair outcomes, yet validation for response to therapy is needed. We examined the relation between contemporary criteria and outcomes with mitral transcatheter edge-to-edge repair therapy. Methods: Mitral transcatheter edge-to-edge repair patients were classified according to anatomic and clinical criteria (1) Heart Valve Collaboratory criteria for nonsuitability; (2) commercial indications (suitable); and (3) neither (ie, intermediate). Analyses for Mitral Valve Academic Research Consortium–defined outcomes of reduction in mitral regurgitation and survival were performed. Results: Among 386 patients (median age, 82 years; 48% women), the most common classification was intermediate (46%), with 138 patients (36%) and 70 patients (18%) in the suitable and nonsuitable categories, respectively. Nonsuitable classification was related to prior valve surgery, smaller mitral valve area, type IIIa morphology, larger coaptation depth, and shorter posterior leaflet. Nonsuitable classification was associated with less technical success (P <0.001) and survival free of mortality, heart failure hospitalization, and mitral surgery (P <0.001). Among the nonsuitable patients, technical failure or any 30-day major adverse cardiac event occurred in 25.7%. Nevertheless, in these patients, acceptable mitral regurgitation reduction without adverse events still occurred in 69%, and their 1-year survival with mild or no symptoms was 52%. Conclusions: Contemporary classification criteria identify patients less suitable for mitral transcatheter edge-to-edge repair with respect to acute procedural success and survival, though patients most commonly fit an intermediate category. In experienced centers, sufficient mitral regurgitation reduction can be achieved safely in the selected patients even with challenging anatomy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: SAPIEN3 (S3) is a ubiquitous redo-transcatheter aortic valve (TAV) replacement alternative for degenerated Evolut valves, but S3 sizing for S3-in-Evolut remains unclear. We sought to compare the impact of in vivo computed tomography (CT)-sizing on redo-TAV feasibility for S3-in-Evolut with traditional bench-sizing., Methods: CT scans of 290 patients treated using Evolut R/PRO/PRO+ between July 2015 and December 2021 were analyzed. S3-in-Evolut was simulated using S3 outflow/neoskirt plane (NSP) at node-6, -5, and -4. CT-sizing for S3 was determined by averaging 4 areas of the Evolut stent frame at NSP level and 3 nodes below. Redo-TAV was deemed feasible if the NSP was below the coronaries, or the narrowest valve (virtual S3)-to-aorta distance was >4 mm. Risk of prosthesis-patient mismatch was estimated using predicted indexed-effective orifice area., Results: Compared with bench-sizing, CT-sizing yielded smaller S3 size in 82% at node-6, 81% at node-5, and 84% at node-4. Factors associated with CT-sizing less than bench-sizing were larger index Evolut size, underexpansion of index Evolut, and shallower implant depth (all P <0.05). CT-sizing increased redo-TAV feasibility by +8% at node-6, +10% at node-5, and +4% at node-4. Redo-TAV feasibility increased with annulus size, sinotubular junction dimensions, coronary heights, index Evolut size, deeper Evolut implant depth, and lower NSP levels (all P <0.05). CT-sizing had a slightly higher estimated risk of severe prosthesis-patient mismatch (9% at node-6, 7% at node-5, and 6% at node-4), which could be mitigated by changing the NSP., Conclusions: CT-sizing for S3-in-Evolut is associated with higher feasibility of redo-TAV compared with bench-sizing, potentially reducing the risk of excessive oversizing and S3 underexpansion. Further validation using real-world clinical data is necessary., Competing Interests: Dr Bapat has received consulting fees from Abbott Structural, Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Cavalcante has received consulting fees from 4C, Abbott Structural, Anteris, AriaCV, Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, HighLife, Medtronic, VDyne, WL Gore, Xylocor; has received research grant support from Abbott Northwestern Hospital Foundation; Dr Sorajja has received consulting fees from 4C Medical, Abbott Structural, Adona, Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, Evolution Medical, Foldax, GE Medical, Laza, Medtronic, Phillips, WL Gore, vDyne, xDot; has received institutional research grant support from Abbott Structural, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic and Boston Scientific. The other authors report no conflicts.

Although current studies support the use of prophylactic distal perfusion catheters (DPCs) to decrease limb ischemia in patients on venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA ECMO), methods for monitoring limb ischemia differ between studies. We evaluated the safety of a selective rather than prophylactic DPC strategy at a single center with a well-established protocol for limb ischemia monitoring. Distal perfusion catheters were placed selectively if there was evidence of hypoperfusion at any point until decannulation. All patients were followed daily by vascular surgery with continuous regional saturation monitoring. Of 188 patients supported with VA ECMO, there were no significant differences in baseline characteristics between patients with upfront, delayed, and no DPC. Thirty day mortality was highest in patients with an upfront DPC (56% in the upfront DPC group, 19% in the delayed DPC group, and 22% in the no-DPC group, p < 0.001). The incidence of major bleeding, fasciotomy, and amputation in the entire cohort was 3.7%, 3.7%, and 0%, respectively. With strict adherence to a protocol for limb ischemia monitoring, a selective rather than prophylactic DPC strategy is safe and may obviate the risks of an additional arterial catheter., Competing Interests: Disclosure: P.M.E .: Consulting for Abbott, Ancora, Daxor, Medtronic. K.H.: Consultant for Abiomed. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to report., (Copyright © ASAIO 2024.)

Background: We examined the procedural outcomes of chronic total occlusions (CTO) percutaneous coronary interventions in patients with prior coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG)., Methods and Results: We compared the clinical, angiographic characteristics and outcomes of 3486 CTO interventions performed in patients with (n=1101) and without (n=2317) prior CABG at 21 centers. Prior CABG patients (32% of total cohort) were older (67±9 versus 63±10 years; P<0.001) and had more comorbidities and lower left ventricular ejection fraction (50% [40-58] versus 55% [45-60]; P<0.001). The CTO target vessel in prior CABG patients was the right coronary artery (56%), circumflex (26%), and left anterior descending artery (17%). The mean J-CTO (2.9±1.2 versus 2.2±1.3; P<0.001) and PROGRESS-CTO (Prospective Global Registry for the Study of Chronic Total Occlusion Intervention; 1.5±1.1 versus 1.2±1.0; P<0.001) score was higher in prior CABG patients. Retrograde (53% versus 30%, P<0.001) and antegrade dissection reentry (35% versus 28%; P<0.001) techniques were used more frequently in prior CABG patients. Prior CABG patients had lower technical (84% versus 89%; P<0.001) and procedural (82% versus 87%, P<0.001) success, but similar incidence of in-hospital major complications (3.1% versus 2.5%; P=0.287). In-hospital mortality (1% versus 0.4%; P=0.016) and coronary perforation (7.1% versus 3.1%; P<0.001) occurred more frequently in prior CABG patients, however, CABG patients had a lower incidence of pericardial tamponade (0.1% versus 1.0%; P=0.002) and pericardiocentesis (0% versus 1.3%; P<0.001)., Conclusions: In a large multicenter CTO percutaneous coronary interventions registry, prior CABG patients had lower success rate but similar overall risk for complications, although mortality was higher and the incidence of tamponade was lower., Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT02061436.