Search

Ferdinand Vogt,1 Susanne Wicklein,2 Markus Gosch,2 Jürgen Jessl,3 Wolfgang Hitzl,4 Theodor Fischlein,1 Matthias Pauschinger,3 Steffen Pfeiffer,1 Dennis Eckner3 1Department of Cardiac Surgery, Paracelsus Medical University, Nuremberg, Germany; 2Department of Geriatric Medicine, Paracelsus Medical University, Nuremberg, Germany; 3Department of Cardiology, Paracelsus Medical University, Nuremberg, Germany; 4Research Office – Biostatistics, Paracelsus Medical University, Salzburg, Austria Background: Frailty is a geriatric syndrome that can influence mortality and functional recovery after treatment of severe aortic stenosis (AS). The integration of standardized geriatric assessment (GA) in clinical practice is limited by a lack of consensus on how to measure it. Objectives: This study aims to compare the incremental predictive value of different frailty scales to predict the outcomes following surgical aortic valve replacement, transcatheter aortic valve implantation, and conservative treatment of severe AS. Methods: A prospective cohort of 300 older adults with severe AS will be assembled after standard clinical examinations and a comprehensive GA, including 18 different tests and values. Primary outcome parameters are overall mortality, cardiovascular mortality, quality of life, and functionality. Secondary parameters are overall complications, cardiovascular complications, and costs. Results: Expected results will contribute to the growing body of evidence on frailty based on parameters that influence clinical and functional outcome in elderly patients independent of the method of treatment. The pre-procedural assessment is expected to be valuable in discriminating new post-procedural complications from simple exacerbations of pre-existing conditions. Therefore, a new frailty test which is simple and feasible for application in a clinical routine by most medical professionals, may help in identifying patients for whom further GA should be considered. Finally, such a frailty score could support heart teams to find the right treatment for patients suffering from AS. Conclusion: Comparison of different frailty scales has not only the goal of finding a predictive value of mortality but also to bring in a meaningful improvement for each individual patient and to avoid disability or fatal outcomes. Keywords: frailty, aortic valve, geriatric assessment, transcatheter aortic valve implantation, TAVI, aortic valve replacement, AVR

Background: Heart failure-related cardiogenic shock (HF-CS) accounts for a significant proportion of all CS cases. Nevertheless, there is a lack of evidence on sex-related differences in HF-CS, especially regarding use of treatment and mortality risk in women vs. men. This study aimed to investigate potential differences in clinical presentation, use of treatments, and mortality between women and men with HF-CS., Methods: In this international observational study, patients with HF-CS (without acute myocardial infarction) from 16 tertiary-care centers in five countries were enrolled between 2010 and 2021. Logistic and Cox regression models were used to assess differences in clinical presentation, use of treatments, and 30-day mortality in women vs. men with HF-CS., Results: N = 1030 patients with HF-CS were analyzed, of whom 290 (28.2%) were women. Compared to men, women were more likely to be older, less likely to have a known history of heart failure or cardiovascular risk factors, and lower rates of highly depressed left ventricular ejection fraction and renal dysfunction. Nevertheless, CS severity as well as use of treatments were comparable, and female sex was not independently associated with 30-day mortality (53.0% vs. 50.8%; adjusted HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.75-1.19)., Conclusions: In this large HF-CS registry, sex disparities in risk factors and clinical presentation were observed. Despite these differences, the use of treatments was comparable, and both sexes exhibited similarly high mortality rates. Further research is necessary to evaluate if sex-tailored treatment, accounting for the differences in cardiovascular risk factors and clinical presentation, might improve outcomes in HF-CS., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Currently, use of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) in non-ischaemic cardiogenic shock (CS) is predominantly guided by shock-specific markers, and not by markers of cardiac function. We hypothesise that left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) can identify patients with a higher likelihood to benefit from MCS and thus help to optimise their expected benefit., Methods: Patients with non-ischaemic CS and available data on LVEF from 16 tertiary-care centres in five countries were analysed. Cox regression models were fitted to evaluate the association between LVEF and mortality, as well as the interaction between LVEF, MCS use and mortality., Results: N = 807 patients were analysed: mean age 63 [interquartile range (IQR) 51.5-72.0] years, 601 (74.5%) male, lactate 4.9 (IQR 2.6-8.5) mmol/l, LVEF 20 (IQR 15-30) %. Lower LVEF was more frequent amongst patients with more severe CS, and MCS was more likely used in patients with lower LVEF. There was no association between LVEF and 30-day mortality risk in the overall study cohort. However, there was a significant interaction between MCS use and LVEF, indicating a lower 30-day mortality risk with MCS use in patients with LVEF ≤ 20% (hazard ratio 0.72, 95% confidence interval 0.51-1.02 for LVEF ≤ 20% vs. hazard ratio 1.31, 95% confidence interval 0.85-2.01 for LVEF > 20%, interaction-p = 0.017)., Conclusion: This retrospective study may indicate a lower mortality risk with MCS use only in patients with severely reduced LVEF. This may propose the inclusion of LVEF as an adjunctive parameter for MCS decision-making in non-ischaemic CS, aiming to optimise the benefit-risk ratio., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Aims: Veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation therapy (VA-ECMO) restores circulation and tissue oxygenation in cardiogenic shock (CS) patients, but can also lead to complications. This study aimed to quantify VA-ECMO complications and analyse their association with overall survival as well as favourable neurological outcome (cerebral performance categories 1 + 2)., Methods and Results: All-comer patients with CS treated with VA-ECMO were retrospectively enrolled from 16 centres in four countries (2005-2019). Neurological, bleeding, and ischaemic adverse events (AEs) were considered. From these, typical VA-ECMO complications were identified and analysed separately as device-related complications. n = 501. Overall, 118 were women (24%), median age was 56.0 years, median lactate was 8.1 mmol/L. Acute myocardial infarction caused CS in 289 patients (58%). Thirty-days mortality was 40% (198/501 patients). At least one device-related complication occurred in 252/486 (52%) patients, neurological AEs in 108/469 (23%), bleeding in 192/480 (40%), ischaemic AEs in 123/478 (26%). The 22% of patients with the most AEs accounted for 50% of all AEs. All types of AEs were associated with a worse prognosis. Aside from neurological ones, all AEs and device-related complications were more likely to occur in women; although prediction of AEs outside of neurological AEs was generally poor., Conclusion: Therapy and device-related complications occur in half of all patients treated with VA-ECMO and are associated with a worse prognosis. They accumulate in some patients, especially in women. Aside from neurological events, identification of patients at risk is difficult, highlighting the need to establish additional quantitative markers of complication risk to guide VA-ECMO treatment in CS., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: Dr Bernhardt reports personal fees from Abbott, personal fees from Abiomed, personal fees from Astra Zeneca, personal fees from Berlin Heart, personal fees from Fine Heart, personal fees from Medtronic, outside the submitted work; Dr Morrow reports grants and personal fees from Abbott Laboratories, grants from Abiomed, grants from Amgen, grants from Anthos Therapeutics, grants from ARCA Biopharma, grants from AstraZeneca, grants from Bayer Healthcare, grants from Eisai, grants, and personal fees from Merck, grants and personal fees from Novartis, grants from Pfizer, grants from Regneron Pharmaceuticals, grants and personal fees from Roche Diagnostics, grants from Siemens, personal fees from InCardia, personal fees from Inflammatix, outside the submitted work; Dr Varshney reports personal fees from Broadview Ventures, outside the submitted work. The other authors report no conflicts of interest., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Aims: Heart failure-related cardiogenic shock (HF-CS) accounts for a significant proportion of CS cases. Whether patients with de novo HF and those with acute-on-chronic HF in CS differ in clinical characteristics and outcome remains unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate differences in clinical presentation and mortality between patients with de novo and acute-on-chronic HF-CS., Methods and Results: In this international observational study, patients with HF-CS from 16 tertiary care centres in five countries were enrolled between 2010 and 2021. To investigate differences in clinical presentation and 30-day mortality, adjusted logistic/Cox regression models were fitted. Patients (n = 1030) with HF-CS were analysed, of whom 486 (47.2%) presented with de novo HF-CS and 544 (52.8%) with acute-on-chronic HF-CS. Traditional markers of CS severity (e.g. blood pressure, heart rate and lactate) as well as use of treatments were comparable between groups. However, patients with acute-on-chronic HF-CS were more likely to have a higher CS severity and also a higher mortality risk, after adjusting for relevant confounders (de novo HF 45.5%, acute-on-chronic HF 55.9%, adjusted hazard ratio 1.38, 95% confidence interval 1.10-1.72, p = 0.005)., Conclusion: In this large HF-CS cohort, acute-on-chronic HF-CS was associated with more severe CS and higher mortality risk compared to de novo HF-CS, although traditional markers of CS severity and use of treatments were comparable. These findings highlight the vast heterogeneity of patients with HF-CS, emphasize that HF chronicity is a relevant disease modifier in CS, and indicate that future clinical trials should account for this., (© 2023 The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: predicting the 1-year survival of patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is indispensable for managing safe early discharge strategies and resource optimization., Methods: Routinely acquired data (134 variables) were used from 629 patients, who underwent transfemoral TAVI from 2012 up to 2018. Support vector machines, neuronal networks, random forests, nearest neighbour and Bayes models were used with new, previously unseen patients to predict 1-year mortality in TAVI patients. A genetic variable selection algorithm identified a set of predictor variables with high predictive power., Results: Univariate analyses revealed 19 variables (clinical, laboratory, echocardiographic, computed tomographic and ECG) that significantly influence 1-year survival. Before applying the reject option, the model performances in terms of negative predictive value (NPV) and positive predictive value (PPV) were similar between all models. After applying the reject option, the random forest model identified a subcohort showing a negative predictive value of 96% (positive predictive value = 92%, accuracy = 96%)., Conclusions: Our model can predict the 1-year survival with very high negative and sufficiently high positive predictive value, with very high accuracy. The "reject option" allows a high performance and harmonic integration of machine learning in the clinical decision process.

Aims: Despite its high incidence and mortality risk, there is no evidence-based treatment for non-ischaemic cardiogenic shock (CS). The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) for non-ischaemic CS treatment., Methods and Results: In this multicentre, international, retrospective study, data from 890 patients with non-ischaemic CS, defined as CS due to severe de-novo or acute-on-chronic heart failure with no need for urgent revascularization, treated with or without active MCS, were collected. The association between active MCS use and the primary endpoint of 30-day mortality was assessed in a 1:1 propensity-matched cohort. MCS was used in 386 (43%) patients. Patients treated with MCS presented with more severe CS (37% vs. 23% deteriorating CS, 30% vs. 25% in extremis CS) and had a lower left ventricular ejection fraction at baseline (21% vs. 25%). After matching, 267 patients treated with MCS were compared with 267 patients treated without MCS. In the matched cohort, MCS use was associated with a lower 30-day mortality (hazard ratio 0.76, 95% confidence interval 0.59-0.97). This finding was consistent through all tested subgroups except when CS severity was considered, indicating risk reduction especially in patients with deteriorating CS. However, complications occurred more frequently in patients with MCS; e.g. severe bleeding (16.5% vs. 6.4%) and access-site related ischaemia (6.7% vs. 0%)., Conclusion: In patients with non-ischaemic CS, MCS use was associated with lower 30-day mortality as compared to medical therapy only, but also with more complications. Randomized trials are needed to validate these findings., (© 2023 The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: It is currently unclear if active left ventricular (LV) unloading should be used as a primary treatment strategy or as a bailout in patients with cardiogenic shock (CS) treated with venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO)., Objectives: This study sought to evaluate the association between timing of active LV unloading and implantation of VA-ECMO with outcomes of patients with CS., Methods: Data from 421 patients with CS treated with VA-ECMO and active LV unloading at 18 tertiary care centers in 4 countries were analyzed. Patients were stratified by timing of device implantation in early vs delayed active LV unloading (defined by implantation before up to 2 hours after VA-ECMO). Adjusted Cox and logistic regression models were fitted to evaluate the association between early active LV unloading and 30-day mortality as well as successful weaning from ventilation., Results: Overall, 310 (73.6%) patients with CS were treated with early active LV unloading. Early active LV unloading was associated with a lower 30-day mortality risk (HR: 0.64; 95% CI: 0.46-0.88) and a higher likelihood of successful weaning from ventilation (OR: 2.17; 95% CI: 1.19-3.93) but not with more complications. Importantly, the relative mortality risk increased and the likelihood of successful weaning from ventilation decreased almost proportionally with the time interval between VA-ECMO implantation and (delayed) initiation of active LV unloading., Conclusions: This exploratory study lends support to the use of early active LV unloading in CS patients on VA-ECMO, although the findings need to be validated in a randomized controlled trial., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Drs Schrage and Westermann were funded by the German Center for Cardiovascular Research, and Dr Schrage is also funded by the Else Kröner-Fresenius-Stiftung. This study was funded by an unrestricted research grant from Abiomed. However, Abiomed was not involved in the design of the study, the collection and analysis of the data, the writing of the manuscript, or the decision to publish. Dr Schrage has received speaker fees from Abiomed and AstraZeneca, outside of the submitted work. Dr Blankenberg has received grants and personal fees from Abbott Diagnostics, Bayer, Siemens, and Thermo Fisher; grants from Singulex; and personal fees from Abbott, AstraZeneca, AMGEN, Medtronic, Pfizer, Roche, Siemens Diagnostics, and Novartis, outside of the submitted work. Dr Eckner has received speaker fees from Abiomed, Bayer, and Daiichi Sankyo, outside of the submitted work. Dr Kirchhof has received research support for basic, translational, and clinical research projects from the European Union, British Heart Foundation, Leducq Foundation, Medical Research Council (United Kingdom), and German Center for Cardiovascular Research; has received research support from several drug and device companies active in atrial fibrillation; has received honoraria from several such companies in the past but not in the last 3 years; and is listed as inventor on 2 patents held by the University of Birmingham (Atrial Fibrillation Therapy WO 2015140571, Markers for Atrial Fibrillation WO 2016012783; unrelated to the submitted work). Dr Mangner has received personal fees from Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Biotronik, Novartis, Sanofi Genzyme, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Bayer, Abbott, Abiomed, and Boston Scientific, outside the submitted work. Dr Mierke has received speaker fees from Abiomed, outside the submitted work. Dr Morrow has served as a member of the TIMI Study Group, which has received institutional research grant support through Brigham and Women’s Hospital from Abbott Laboratories, Amgen, Anthos Therapeutics, Arca Biopharma, AstraZeneca, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, Intarcia, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Quark Pharmaceuticals, Regeneron, Roche, Siemens, The Medicines Company, and Zora Biosciences; and received consulting fees from Arca Biopharma, Bayer Pharma, InCarda, Inflammatix, Merck, Novartis, and Roche Diagnostics. Dr Pappalardo has served as a consultant for Abiomed. Dr Westermann has received speaker fees from Abiomed, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Berlin-Chemie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, and Medtronic, outside of the submitted work. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2023 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The aim of this study was to analyse the outcome of patients between 50 and 69 years of age undergoing biological or mechanical aortic valve replacement., Methods: Data were collected from the German Aortic Valve Registry. Data were analysed regarding baseline characteristics and outcome parameters such as 5-year survival, stroke and reintervention., Results: In total., 3046 patients undergoing isolated surgical aortic valve replacement between 2011 and 2012 were investigated and a propensity score matching was performed. Within this period, 2239 patients received a biological prostheses, while 807 patients received a mechanical prosthesis. Mean age in the biological group was 63.07 (±5.11) and 57.34 (±4.67) in the mechanical group (standardized mean difference 1.172). In the overall cohort, there were more female patients in the biological group (32.7% vs 28.4%) and log EuroSCORE I was higher (5.41% vs 4.26%). After propensity matching (610 pairs), there was no difference in the mortality at 5-year follow-up (12.1% biological vs 9.2% mechanical P = 0.05) nor for reoperation/reintervention (2.5% biological vs 2.0% mechanical, P = 0.546). Patients undergoing mechanical aortic valve replacement suffered from a higher stroke rate 3.3% vs 1.5% (P = 0.04) at 5-year follow-up., Conclusions: Aortic valve replacement with biological or mechanical prostheses showed similar 5-year outcomes for survival and reoperation in a propensity-matched cohort, but significantly increased stroke rate after mechanical aortic valve replacement. This could influence the choice of a mechanical valve in younger patients., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. All rights reserved.)

The COVID-19 pandemic is placing a heavy burden on healthcare systems worldwide with the risk that acute cardiovascular diseases are treated too late. The present study aims to analyze patients with acute coronary syndrome in the current pandemic. A total of 966 patients (2019 n = 463, 2020 n = 503) can be evaluated. A comparison of patient care during and before the COVID-19 pandemic was made in terms of patient characteristics and pre- and in-hospital processes. Another aim is to show how many patients seek clinical care at a late stage of the disease. After Lockdown in Germany at week 12, 2020, there was a significant decrease in patients with an acute coronary syndrome (ACS), significant for STEMI cases in the first weeks after Lockdown (calendar week 13-16 2019 n = 43, 2020 n = 30; p = 0.02). The time from pain to first medical contact (time to FMC) is significantly extended during Lockdown, while internal clinical processes are unchanged. The rate of subacute myocardial infarction is numerically, but not significantly increased in calendar weeks 15, 2020 ( p = 0.40) and 16 ( p = 0,19). In addition, elderly patients avoid treatment for multifactorial reasons, and the longer overall pain to FMC may impact long-term mortality.

Background: The vascular access in transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) was initially dominated by a surgical approach. Meanwhile, percutaneous closure systems became a well-established alternative. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcome between the two approaches., Methods: In this retrospective study, we observed 787 patients undergoing a TAVR-Procedure between 2013 and 2019. Of those, 338 patients were treated with surgical access and 449 with the Perclose ProGlide™-System (Abbott, Chicago, IL, USA). According to the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) and Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC) criteria, the primary combined endpoints were defined., Results: Overall hospital mortality was 2.8% with no significant difference between surgical (3.8%) and percutaneous (2.2%) access ( p = 0.182). Major vascular complications or bleeding defined as the primary combined endpoint was not significantly different in either group (Surgical group 5.3%, ProGlide group 5.1%, p = 0.899). In the ProGlide group, women with pre-existing peripheral artery disease (PAD) were significantly more often affected by a vascular complication ( p = 0.001 for female sex and p = 0.03 for PAD)., Conclusions: We were able to show that the use of both accesses is safe. However, the surgical access route should also be considered in case of peripheral artery disease.

Background: Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) is increasingly used to treat cardiogenic shock. However, VA-ECMO might hamper myocardial recovery. The Impella unloads the left ventricle. This study aimed to evaluate whether left ventricular unloading in patients with cardiogenic shock treated with VA-ECMO was associated with lower mortality., Methods: Data from 686 consecutive patients with cardiogenic shock treated with VA-ECMO with or without left ventricular unloading using an Impella at 16 tertiary care centers in 4 countries were collected. The association between left ventricular unloading and 30-day mortality was assessed by Cox regression models in a 1:1 propensity score-matched cohort., Results: Left ventricular unloading was used in 337 of the 686 patients (49%). After matching, 255 patients with left ventricular unloading were compared with 255 patients without left ventricular unloading. In the matched cohort, left ventricular unloading was associated with lower 30-day mortality (hazard ratio, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.63-0.98]; P =0.03) without differences in various subgroups. Complications occurred more frequently in patients with left ventricular unloading: severe bleeding in 98 (38.4%) versus 45 (17.9%), access site-related ischemia in 55 (21.6%) versus 31 (12.3%), abdominal compartment in 23 (9.4%) versus 9 (3.7%), and renal replacement therapy in 148 (58.5%) versus 99 (39.1%)., Conclusions: In this international, multicenter cohort study, left ventricular unloading was associated with lower mortality in patients with cardiogenic shock treated with VA-ECMO, despite higher complication rates. These findings support use of left ventricular unloading in patients with cardiogenic shock treated with VA-ECMO and call for further validation, ideally in a randomized, controlled trial.

This disease with its multiple ischemic and non-ischemic manifestations is classified based on the fourth universal definition of myocardial infarction (MI). An acute myocardial injury is defined as a significant increase of cardiac troponins (cTn). In patients with an additional myocardial ischemia, which is defined by certain clinical, electrocardiographic, imaging and angiographic criteria, the diagnosis of acute MI can be made. Etiologically, MI can be divided into 5 types: type 1 ischemic by plaque rupture or plaque erosion with thrombus formation, type 2 imbalance between myocardial oxygen demand and supply, type 3 MI as suspected cause of death before determination of cTn, type 4a <48 h after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), type 4b stent thrombosis, type 4c in-stent stenosis and type 5 <48 h after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). This classification reflects the heterogeneity of acute MI. Based on clearly defined criteria the guidelines attempt to provide clinically active physicians with assistance in the diagnosis and treatment of this specific disease. Nevertheless, it is still necessary to take a holistic view of the patient with all the individual characteristics.

Backgropund and Aim: Postoperative thrombocytopenia after surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) or transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and aggravating causes were the aim of this retrospective study., Methods: Data of all patients treated with SAVR (n = 1068) and TAVR (n = 816) due to severe aortic valve stenosis was collected at our center from 2010 to 2017. Preprocedural and postprocedural values were collected from electronic patient records., Results: There was a significant drop in platelets in both groups, the TAVR group showed overall superior platelet preservation compared to the AVR group (P < .001). In the SAVR subgroup analysis, a significant difference in platelet preservation was observed between the valve types (P < .001), particularly with the Freedom SOLO valve. In the TAVR subgroup analysis, the valve type did not influence platelet count (PLT) reduction (P = .13). In the SAVR subgroup analyses, PLT was found to be worsened with cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) duration., Conclusion: Thrombocytopenia frequently occurs after implantation of a biological heart valve prosthesis, with a higher frequency observed in patients after cardiac surgery rather than TAVR. Although some surgical bioprosthetic models are more susceptible to this phenomenon, CPB duration seems to be a major determinant for the development of postoperative thrombocytopenia., (© 2020 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Background: Percutaneous mechanical circulatory support devices are increasingly used in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock (AMI-CS), despite limited evidence for their effectiveness. The aim of this study was to evaluate outcomes associated with use of the Impella device compared with intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) and medical treatment in patients with AMI-CS., Methods: Data of patients with AMI-CS treated with the Impella device at European tertiary care hospitals were collected retrospectively. All patients underwent early revascularization and received optimal medical treatment. Using IABP-SHOCK II (Intraaortic Balloon Pump in Cardiogenic Shock II) trial inclusion and exclusion criteria, 372 patients were identified and included in this analysis. These patients were matched to 600 patients from the IABP-SHOCK II trial. The following baseline criteria were used as matching parameters: age, sex, mechanical ventilation, ejection fraction, prior cardiopulmonary resuscitation, and lactate. Primary end point was 30-day all-cause mortality., Results: In total, 237 patients treated with an Impella could be matched to 237 patients from the IABP-SHOCK II trial. Baseline parameters were similarly distributed after matching. There was no significant difference in 30-day all-cause mortality (48.5% versus 46.4%, P=0.64). Severe or life-threatening bleeding (8.5% versus 3.0%, P<0.01) and peripheral vascular complications (9.8% versus 3.8%, P=0.01) occurred significantly more often in the Impella group. Limiting the analysis to IABP-treated patients as a control group did not change the results., Conclusions: In this retrospective analysis of patients with AMI-CS, the use of an Impella device was not associated with lower 30-day mortality compared with matched patients from the IABP-SHOCK II trial treated with an IABP or medical therapy. To further evaluate this, a large randomized trial is warranted to determine the effect of the Impella device on outcome in patients with AMI-CS., Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT03313687.

Aims: Life-threatening complications occur during transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) which can require emergent cardiac surgery (ECS). Risks and outcomes of patients needing ECS during or immediately after TAVI are still unclear., Methods and Results: Incidence, risk factors, management, and outcomes of patients requiring ECS during transfemoral (TF)-TAVI were analysed from a contemporary real-world multicentre registry. Between 2013 and 2016, 27 760 patients underwent TF-TAVI in 79 centres. Of these, 212 (0.76%) patients required ECS (age 82.4 ± 6.3 years, 67.5% females, logistic EuroSCORE: 17.1%, STS-score 5.8%). The risk of ECS declined from 2013 (1.07%) to 2014 (0.70%) but remained stable since. Annual TF-TAVI numbers have more than doubled from 2013 to 2016. Leading causes for ECS were left ventricular perforation by the guidewire (28.3%) and annular rupture (21.2%). Immediate procedural mortality (<72 h) of TF-TAVI patients requiring ECS was 34.6%. Overall in-hospital mortality was 46.0%, and highest in case of annular rupture (62%). Independent predictors of in-hospital mortality following ECS were age > 85 years [odds ratio (OR) 1.87, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) (1.02-3.45), P = 0.044], annular rupture [OR 1.96, 95% CI (0.94-4.10), P = 0.060], and immediate ECS [OR 3.12, 95% CI (1.07-9.11), P = 0.037]. One year of survival of the 114 patients surviving the in-hospital period was only 40.4%., Conclusion: Between 2014 and 2016, the need for ECS remained stable around 0.7%. Left ventricular guidewire perforation and annular rupture were the most frequent causes, accounting for almost half of ECS cases. Half of the patients could be salvaged by ECS-nevertheless, 1 year of all-cause mortality was high even in those ECS patients surviving the in-hospital period., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author 2017. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)