Search

Background: There continues to be debate regarding the superiority of transcatheter (TAVR) over surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients with bicuspid aortic valves (BAV). We aimed to compare outcomes during readmissions in elderly patients with BAV who underwent SAVR or TAVR., Methods: Patients 65 years or older with BAV who underwent TAVR or isolated SAVR were identified using the National Readmission Database from 2012 through 2018. We compared outcomes during readmissions within 90 days after discharge from the index surgery. Propensity score matching was performed to adjust the baseline differences., Results: During the study period, 8555 and 1081 elderly patients with BAV underwent SAVR and TAVR, respectively. The number of patients who underwent TAVR went up by 179 % from 2012 to 2018. Propensity score matching yielded 573 patients in each group. A total of 111 (19.4 %) in the SAVR group and 125 (21.8 %) in the TAVR group were readmitted within 90 days after the index surgery (p = .31). The mortality during the readmissions within 90 days was equivalent between the two groups (0.9 % in the SAVR group vs. 3.2 % in the TAVR group, p = .22). However, the median hospital cost was approximately doubled in the TAVR group during the readmission (18,250 dollars vs. 9310 dollars in the SAVR group, p < .001)., Conclusions: Readmission within 90 days was common in both groups. While the mortality during the readmissions after the surgery was equivalent between the two groups, hospital cost was significantly more expensive in the TAVR group., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: IS receives institutional research support from Abbott, Artivion, Atricure, Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Terumo Aortic. None related to this manuscript., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Reoperative sternotomy is associated with poor outcomes after cardiac surgery. We aimed to investigate the impact of reoperative sternotomy on the outcomes after aortic root replacement., Methods: All patients who underwent aortic root replacement from January 2011 to June 2020 were identified using the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Surgery Database. We compared outcomes between patients who underwent first-time aortic root replacement with those with a history of sternotomy undergoing reoperative sternotomy aortic root replacement using propensity score matching. Subgroup analysis was performed among the reoperative sternotomy aortic root replacement group., Results: A total of 56,447 patients underwent aortic root replacement. Among them, 14,935 (26.5%) underwent reoperative sternotomy aortic root replacement. The annual incidence of reoperative sternotomy aortic root replacement increased from 542 in 2011 to 2300 in 2019. Aneurysm and dissection were more frequently observed in the first-time aortic root replacement group, whereas infective endocarditis was more common in the reoperative sternotomy aortic root replacement group. Propensity score matching yielded 9568 pairs in each group. Cardiopulmonary bypass time was longer in the reoperative sternotomy aortic root replacement group (215 vs 179 minutes, standardized mean difference = 0.43). Operative mortality was higher in the reoperative sternotomy aortic root replacement group (10.8% vs 6.2%, standardized mean difference = 0.17). In the subgroup analysis, logistic regression demonstrated that individual patient repetition of (second or more resternotomy) surgery and annual institutional volume of aortic root replacement were independently associated with operative mortality., Conclusions: The incidence of reoperative sternotomy aortic root replacement might have increased over time. Reoperative sternotomy is a significant risk factor for morbidity and mortality in aortic root replacement. Referral to high-volume aortic centers should be considered in patients undergoing reoperative sternotomy aortic root replacement., (Copyright © 2023 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Trileaflet aortic valve neocuspidization (AVN) using autologous pericardium (Ozaki procedure) is an emerging surgical treatment option for aortic valve diseases. Although excellent results have been reported from Japan, data pertaining to its use in the United States are sparse., Methods: All adult patients who underwent AVN (AVN group) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) with a bioprosthetic valve (SAVR group) between 2015 and 2022 were identified. Propensity score matching was used to adjust the baseline characteristics between the 2 groups., Results: A total of 101 patients underwent AVN, and 1816 patients underwent SAVR with a bioprosthetic valve. None in the AVN group required conversion to SAVR. Before matching, mean age in the AVN group was 68.5 ± 8.8 years, and 56 patients (55.4%) underwent concomitant procedures. Preoperatively, 3 (3%) had endocarditis. Bicuspid valve was observed in 38 (38.4%). None died at 30 days in the AVN group. The median follow-up duration was 3.2 years. After propensity score matching, the expected survival and freedom from at least moderate aortic regurgitation at 5 years was 91.7% ± 3.1% and 97.6% ± 1.7%, respectively. Propensity score matching yielded 77 patients in each group. The Kaplan-Meier curve demonstrated equivalent survival at 5 years between the 2 groups (P = .95). Additionally, freedom from at least moderate aortic regurgitation was comparable at 5 years (P = .23)., Conclusions: AVN can be safely performed for a variety of aortic valve diseases, with or without concomitant operations. AVN demonstrated similar midterm outcomes compared with SAVR with a bioprosthetic valve in the United States adult population., (Copyright © 2024 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Stentless aortic root replacement (ARR) and aortic root enlargement (ARE) are established strategies to avoid prosthesis-patient mismatch in patients with aortic stenosis (AS) and small annuli. We sought to compare outcomes of these 2 procedures., Methods: This was an observational study using an institutional database of aortic valve replacements from 2010 to 2021. The study compared patients who underwent ARE vs ARR for AS. Those with endocarditis or aortic aneurysms were excluded. Postoperative outcomes were compared between groups. Kaplan-Meier survival estimation and multivariable Cox regression for survival were performed. Cumulative incidence functions were generated for all-cause readmissions., Results: A total of 533 patients underwent either ARE or ARR for AS. Of these, 193 (36.2%) underwent ARE and 340 (63.8%) underwent ARR with a stentless xenograft. There were no significant differences in operative mortality, stroke, length of stay, or new-onset renal failure requiring dialysis. There were also no significant differences in aortic valve reintervention rates (3.1% vs 1.8%; P = .314). Patients in the ARR group had larger valves implanted, larger indexed effective orifice areas, lower rates of prosthesis-patient mismatch, and lower transprosthetic gradients (P < .001). Median follow-up was 5.02 (2.70-7.8) years. Kaplan-Meier survival estimates were comparable, and on multivariable Cox regression, ARR vs ARE was not significantly associated with an increased hazard of death (hazard ratio, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.69-1.45; P = .996). Cumulative incidence estimates for all-cause readmissions were also comparable between groups., Conclusions: ARE and stentless xenograft ARR for AS were associated with comparable postoperative complications, aortic valve reinterventions, freedom from readmission, and 5-year survival., (Copyright © 2023 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Outcome comparisons after surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) with minimally invasive approaches including mini-sternotomy (MS) and right mini-thoracotomy (RMT) and full sternotomy (FS) have been conflicting. Furthermore, the synthesis of mid-term mortality has not been performed., Methods: MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched through April 2022 to identify propensity score matched (PSM) studies or randomized controlled trial (RCT) which compared outcomes following SAVR among three incisional approaches: FS, MS, or RMT. The network analysis was performed to compare these approaches with random effects model. Mid-term mortality was defined as 1-year mortality., Results: A total of 42 studies met the inclusion criteria enrolling 14,925 patients. RCT and PSM were performed in 13 and 29 studies, respectively. The operative mortality was significantly lower with MS compared to FS (risk ratio [RR]: 0.60, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.41-0.90, p = .01, I 2  = 25.8%) or RMT (RR: 0.51, 95% CI: 0.27-0.97, p = .03, I 2  = 25.8%). RMT had significantly higher risk of reoperation for bleeding compared to MS (RR: 1.65, 95% CI: 1.18-2.30, p = .003, I 2  = 0%). Hospital length of stay was significantly shorter with MS compared to FS (mean difference: -0.89 days, 95% CI: -1.58 to -0.2, p = .01, I 2  = 95.5%) while it was equivocal between FS and RMT. The mid-term mortality was similar among the three approaches., Conclusions: While mid-term mortality was comparable among approaches, MS may be a safe and potentially more effective approach than FS and RMT for SAVR in the short term., (© 2022 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Few studies have reported their experience in explantation of a transcatheter heart valve. We found 2,100 patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) from 2013 through 2021. Of 2,100, a total of 17 patients underwent surgical aortic valve replacement after TAVI, including surgical bailout. The mean age was 78.3 years. Co-morbidities were very frequent, including coronary artery disease (70.6%), atrial fibrillation (52.9%), cerebrovascular disease (47.1%), and pulmonary hypertension (41.2%). A history of cardiac surgery was observed in 6 patients (35.3%). The mean predicted risk of mortality at the time of TAVI was 7.7%. Surgical bailout was the most common indication of valve explantation (n = 8, 47.1%), followed by infective endocarditis (n = 4, 23.5%) and paravalvular leak (n = 2, 11.8%). The valve-in-valve TAVI was not feasible because of endocarditis, paravalvular leak, and history of valve-in-valve TAVI. Overall, 13 (76.5%) were performed urgently or emergently, and 10 (58.9%) required aortic root reconstruction. The mean cardiopulmonary bypass time was 158.5 minutes. In-hospital mortality was 41.2%. Transcatheter heart valve explantation continues to be rare; however, these data will continue to be informative as TAVI explantations will become more common with time., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

To highlight the trends of surgical (open) aortic valve replacement (SAVR) as well as to compare the outcome between transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and SAVR in elderly dialysis patients. TAVR has evolved as an effective alternative to surgery (SAVR) for aortic stenosis. We identified dialysis-dependent patients who underwent SAVR or TAVR from 2000 to 2015 from the United States Renal Data System using ICD-9 codes. We defined high-risk surgical patients as age over 70 or older. The primary endpoint was survival at 3 years and we compared the outcome between SAVR and TAVR groups using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). A total of 4332 and 1280 dialysis patients underwent SAVR and TAVR, respectively, during the study period. Among SAVR cohort, 3312 patients underwent SAVR before June 2012 and 1020 after June 2012. In-hospital mortality was significantly worse before 2012 (14.6% vs. 11.3% after 2012, p = 0.007) as well as estimated 3-year mortality (69.1% vs. 60.3% after 2012, p < 0.001). After June 2012, the TAVR cohort was older and had more comorbidities including coronary artery disease and congestive heart failure compared to the SAVR cohort. After IPTW, in-hospital mortality was significantly lower after TAVR versus SAVR (odds ratio 0.38 [95% confidence interval [CI], 0.27-0.52], p < 0.001). However, TAVR had a significantly higher risk of 3-year mortality than SAVR (hazard ratio 1.24 [95% CI 1.1-1.39], p < 0.001). TAVR may be a reasonable and potentially preferable alternative to SAVR in the elderly dialysis population in the short-term period., (© 2022 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)