Search

Aortic valve disease is a prevalent disorder that affects approximately 2% of the general adult population. Surgical aortic valve replacement is the gold standard treatment for symptomatic patients. This treatment has demonstrably proven to be both safe and effective. Over the last few decades, in an attempt to reduce surgical trauma, different minimally invasive approaches for aortic valve replacement have been developed and are now being increasingly utilized. A narrative review of the literature was carried out to describe the surgical techniques for minimally invasive aortic valve surgery and report the results from different experienced centers. Minimally invasive aortic valve replacement is associated with low perioperative morbidity, mortality and a low conversion rate to full sternotomy. Long-term survival appears to be at least comparable to that reported for conventional full sternotomy. Minimally invasive aortic valve surgery, either with a partial upper sternotomy or a right anterior minithoracotomy provides early- and long-term benefits. Given these benefits, it may be considered the standard of care for isolated aortic valve disease.

Aortic stenosis (AS) is a common valvular heart disease in the Western populations, with an estimated overall prevalence of 3% in adults over 75 years. To understand its patho-biological processes represents a priority. In elderly patients, AS usually involves trileaflet valves and is referred to as degenerative calcific processes. Scientific evidence suggests the involvement of an active "atherosclerosis-like" pathogenesis in the initiation phase of degenerative AS. To the contrary, the progression could be driven by different forces (such as mechanical stress, genetic factors and interaction between inflammation and calcification). The improved understanding presents potentially new therapeutic targets for preventing and inhibiting the development and progression of the disease. Furthermore, in clinical practice the management of AS patients implies the evaluation of generalized atherosclerotic manifestations (i.e., in the coronary and carotid arteries) even for prognostic reasons. In counselling elderly patients, the risk stratification should address individual frailty beyond the generic risk scores. In these regard, the co-morbidities, and in particular those linked to the global atherosclerotic burden, should be carefully investigated in order to define the risk/benefit ratio for invasive treatment strategies. We present a detailed overview of insights in pathogenesis of AS with possible practical implications.

Background. Sacubitril/valsartan in heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) was shown to be superior to enalapril in reducing the risk of death and hospitalization for HF. Our aim was to evaluate the cardiopulmonary effects of sacubitril/valsartan in patients with HFrEF. Methods. We conducted an observational study. Ninety-nine ambulatory patients with HFrEF underwent serial cardiopulmonary exercise tests (CPET) after initiation of sacubitril/valsartan in addition to recommended therapy. Results. At baseline, 37% of patients had New York Heart Association (NYHA) class III. After a median follow-up of 6.2 months (range 3&ndash, 14.9 months) systolic blood pressure decreased from 117 &plusmn, 14 to 101 &plusmn, 12 mmHg (p &lt, 0.0001), left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) increased from 27 &plusmn, 6 to 29.7 &plusmn, 7% (p &lt, 0.0001), peak oxygen consumption (VO2) improved from 14.6 &plusmn, 3.3 (% of predicted = 53.8 &plusmn, 14.1) to 17.2 &plusmn, 4.7 mL/kg/min (% of predicted = 64.7 &plusmn, 17.8) (p &lt, 0.0001), minute ventilation/carbon dioxide production relationship (VE/VCO2 Slope) decreased from 34.1 &plusmn, 6.3 to 31.7 &plusmn, 6.1 (p = 0.006), VO2 at anaerobic threshold increased from 11.3 &plusmn, 2.6 to 12.6 &plusmn, 3.5 mL/kg/min (p = 0.007), oxygen pulse increased from 11.5 &plusmn, 3.0 to 13.4 &plusmn, 4.3 mL/kg/min (p &lt, 0.0001), and ∆VO2/∆Work increased from 9.2 &plusmn, 1.5 to 10.1 &plusmn, 1.8 mL/min/watt (p = 0.0002). Conclusion. Sacubitril/valsartan improved exercise tolerance, LVEF, peak VO2, and ventilatory efficiency at 6.2 months follow-up. Further studies are necessary to better clarify underlying mechanisms of this functional improvement.