Clinical and haemodynamic outcomes in 658 patients receiving the Perceval sutureless aortic valve: early results from a prospective European multicentre study (the Cavalier Trial)†.

OBJECTIVES The aim of the Cavalier trial was to evaluate the safety and performance of the Perceval sutureless aortic valve in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement (AVR). We report the 30-day clinical and haemodynamic outcomes from the largest study cohort with a sutureless valve. METHODS From February 2010 to September 2013, 658 consecutive patients (mean age 77.8 years; 64.4% females; mean logistic EuroSCORE 10.2%) underwent AVR in 25 European Centres. Isolated AVRs were performed in 451 (68.5%) patients with a less invasive approach in 219 (33.3%) cases. Of the total, 40.0% were octogenarians. Congenital bicuspid aortic valve was considered an exclusion criterion. RESULTS Implantation was successful in 628 patients (95.4%). In isolated AVR through sternotomy, the mean cross-clamp time and the cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) time were 32.6 and 53.7 min, and with the less invasive approach 38.8 and 64.5 min, respectively. The 30-day overall and valve-related mortality rates were 3.7 and 0.5%, respectively. Valve explants, stroke and endocarditis occurred in 0.6, 2.1 and in 0.1% of cases, respectively. Preoperative mean and peak pressure gradients decreased from 44.8 and 73.24 mmHg to 10.24 and 19.27 mmHg at discharge, respectively. The mean effective orifice area improved from 0.72 to 1.46 cm(2). CONCLUSIONS The current 30-day results show that the Perceval valve is safe (favourable haemodynamic effect and low complication rate), and can be implanted with a fast and reproducible technique after a short learning period. Short cross-clamp and CPB times were achieved in both isolated and combined procedures. The Perceval valve represents a promising alternative to biological AVR, especially with a less invasive approach and in older patients.

Sutureless Aortic Valve Replacement International Registry (SU-AVR-IR): design and rationale from the International Valvular Surgery Study Group (IVSSG).

BACKGROUND Sutureless aortic valve replacement (SU-AVR) is an innovative approach which shortens cardiopulmonary bypass and cross-clamp durations and may facilitate minimally invasive approach. Evidence outlining its safety, efficacy, hemodynamic profile and potential complications is replete with small-volume observational studies and few comparative publications. METHODS Minimally invasive aortic valve surgery and high-volume SU-AVR replacement centers were contacted for recruitment into a global collaborative coalition dedicated to sutureless valve research. A Research Steering Committee was formulated to direct research and support the mission of providing registry evidence warranted for SU-AVR. RESULTS The International Valvular Surgery Study Group (IVSSG) was formed under the auspices of the Research Steering Committee, comprised of 36 expert valvular surgeons from 27 major centers across the globe. IVSSG Sutureless Projects currently proceeding include the Retrospective and Prospective Phases of the SU-AVR International Registry (SU-AVR-IR). CONCLUSIONS The global pooling of data by the IVSSG Sutureless Projects will provide required robust clinical evidence on the safety, efficacy and hemodynamic outcomes of SU-AVR.

Sutureless aortic valve replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND Sutureless aortic valve replacement (SU-AVR) has emerged as an innovative alternative for treatment of aortic stenosis. By avoiding the placement of sutures, this approach aims to reduce cross-clamp and cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) duration and thereby improve surgical outcomes and facilitate a minimally invasive approach suitable for higher risk patients. The present systematic review and meta-analysis aims to assess the safety and efficacy of SU-AVR approach in the current literature. METHODS Electronic searches were performed using six databases from their inception to January 2014. Relevant studies utilizing sutureless valves for aortic valve implantation were identified. Data were extracted and analyzed according to predefined clinical endpoints. RESULTS Twelve studies were identified for inclusion of qualitative and quantitative analyses, all of which were observational reports. The minimally invasive approach was used in 40.4% of included patients, while 22.8% underwent concomitant coronary bypass surgery. Pooled cross-clamp and CPB duration for isolated AVR was 56.7 and 46.5 minutes, respectively. Pooled 30-day and 1-year mortality rates were 2.1% and 4.9%, respectively, while the incidences of strokes (1.5%), valve degenerations (0.4%) and paravalvular leaks (PVL) (3.0%) were acceptable. CONCLUSIONS The evaluation of current observational evidence suggests that sutureless aortic valve implantation is a safe procedure associated with shorter cross-clamp and CPB duration, and comparable complication rates to the conventional approach in the short-term.

Expanding Indications of Transcatheter Heart Valve Interventions.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has been established as a less invasive alternative to open-heart surgery in inoperable or high-risk patients presenting with symptomatic severe aortic valve stenosis. The feasibility and efficacy of valve-in-valve implantation in degenerated surgical aortic bioprostheses have also been described and can currently be considered a valuable treatment option in patients deemed unsuitable for repeat cardiac surgery. However, the clinical use of TAVR devices is not limited to the treatment of the tricuspid stenotic aortic valve. Several additional indications including treatment of the bicuspid stenotic aortic valve, aortic regurgitation, and valve-in-valve or valve-in-ring implantation in the mitral or tricuspid position as well as treatment of pure mitral, tricuspid, or pulmonary regurgitation have been described. The purpose of the present review is to summarize the available evidence concerning the emerging off-label use of TAVR devices in current clinical practice. Case examples have been selected to highlight the main procedural steps of each particular intervention.

Mechanical versus biological aortic valve replacement strategies.

Aortic valve replacement (AVR) is the most frequently performed procedure in valve surgery. The controversy about the optimal choice of the prosthetic valve is as old as the technique itself. Currently there is no perfect valve substitute available. The main challenge is to choose between mechanical and biological prosthetic valves. Biological valves include pericardial (bovine, porcine or equine) and native porcine bioprostheses designed in stented or stentless versions. Homografts and pulmonary autografts are reserved for special indications and will not be discussed in detail in this review. We will focus on the decision making between artificial biological and mechanical prostheses, respectively. The first part of this article reviews guideline recommendations concerning the choice of aortic prostheses in different clinical situations while the second part is focused on novel strategies in the treatment of patients with aortic valve pathology.

Development of post-pump syndrome in a sheep after mitral valve stenting

A one-year-old healthy sheep received an implant stenting the mural ('posterior') leaflet of the mitral valve. The experiment was authorized by the Cantonal Ethical Committee. The surgery was performed on the open, beating heart during cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). Management of anaesthesia was based on isoflurane with mechanical intermittent positive pressure ventilation (IPPV) of the lungs, combined with intercostal nerve blocks and intravenous fentanyl and lidocaine. Marked cardiovascular depression occurred towards the end of CPB time and required high doses of dopamine, dobutamine, lidocaine and ephedrine to allow for weaning off the CPB pump. Moreover, severe pulmonary dysfunction developed when IPPV was re-initiated after CPB. Hypoxaemia persisted throughout the recovery from general anaesthesia. Multiple organ failure developed gradually during the three postoperative days, leading to euthanasia of the animal. As described in this case, marked lung injury associated with some degree of failure of other vital organs may occur in sheep after CPB. Intraoperative cardiorespiratory complications when weaning-off may indicate the development of 'post-pump syndrome'.

European multicentre experience with the sutureless Perceval valve: clinical and haemodynamic outcomes up to 5 years in over 700 patients†.

OBJECTIVES This report summarizes the 5-year clinical and haemodynamic data from three prospective, European multicentre trials with the Perceval sutureless aortic valve. METHODS From April 2007 to August 2012, 731 consecutive patients (mean age: 78.5 years; 68.1% females; mean logistic EuroSCORE 10.9%) underwent AVR with the Perceval valve in 25 European centres. Isolated AVR was performed in 498 (68.1%) patients. A minimally invasive approach was performed in 189 (25.9%) cases. The cumulative follow-up was 729 patients-years. RESULTS In isolated AVR, mean cross-clamp and cardiopulmonary bypass times were 30.8 and 50.8 min in full sternotomy, and 37.6 and 64.4 min in the minimally invasive approach, respectively. Early cardiac-related deaths occurred in 1.9%. Overall survival rates at 1 and 5 years were 92.1 and 74.7%, respectively. Major paravalvular leak occurred in 1.4% and 1% at early and late follow-up, respectively. Significant improvement in clinical status was observed postoperatively in the majority of patients. Mean and peak gradients decreased from 42.9 and 74.0 mmHg preoperatively, to 7.8 and 16 mmHg at the 3-year follow-up. LV mass decreased from 254.5 to 177.4 g at 3 years. CONCLUSIONS This European multicentre experience, with the largest cohort of patients with sutureless valves to date, shows excellent clinical and haemodynamic results that remain stable even up to the 5-year follow-up. Even in this elderly patient cohort with 40% octogenarians, both early and late mortality rates were very low. There were no valve migrations, structural valve degeneration or valve thrombosis in the follow-up. The sutureless technique is a promising alternative to biological aortic valve replacement.

Pitfalls and premature failure of the Freedom SOLO stentless valve

Gebiet: Chirurgie Abstract: Objectives This study reports a series of pitfalls, premature failures and explantations of the third generation Freedom SOLO bovine pericardial stentless valve. – – Methods 149 patients underwent aortic valve replacement (AVR) using the FS. Follow-up was 100% complete with an average observation time of 5.5±2.3 years (max. 8.7 years) and a total of 825 patient years. Following intraoperative documentation, all explanted valve prostheses underwent histological examination. – – Results Freedom from structural valve deterioration (SVD) at 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 years was 92%, 88%, 80% and 70% and 62%, respectively. 14 prostheses required explantation due to valve-independent dysfunction (n=5, i.e. thrombus formation, oversizing, aortic dilatation, endocarditis and suture dehiscence) or valve-dependent failure (acute leaflet tears, n=4, severe stenosis, n=5). Thus freedom from explantation at 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 years was 95%, 94%, 91% and 81% and 72%, respectively. An acute vertical tear along the non-coronary/right-coronary commissure to the base occurred at a mean of 6.0 years [range 4.3?7.3 years] and affected size 25 and 27 prostheses exclusively. Four FS required explantation after a mean of 7.5 years [range 7.0?8.3 years] due to severe functional stenosis and gross calcification that included the entire aortic root. – – Conclusions The Freedom SOLO stentless valve is safe to implant and shows satisfying mid-term results in our single institution experience. Freedom from SVD and explantation decreased markedly after only 6 ? 7 years, so that patients with FS require close observation and follow-up. Exact sizing, symmetric positioning and observing patient limitations are crucial for optimal outcome.

Quantitative multi-slice computed tomography assessment of the mitral valvular complex for transcatheter mitral valve interventions part 1: systematic measurement methodology and inter-observer variability

AIMS Transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR) is an emerging technology with the potential to treat patients with severe mitral regurgitation at excessive risk for surgical mitral valve surgery. Multimodal imaging of the mitral valvular complex and surrounding structures will be an important component for patient selection for TMVR. Our aim was to describe and evaluate a systematic multi-slice computed tomography (MSCT) image analysis methodology that provides measurements relevant for transcatheter mitral valve replacement. METHODS AND RESULTS A systematic step-by-step measurement methodology is described for structures of the mitral valvular complex including: the mitral valve annulus, left ventricle, left atrium, papillary muscles and left ventricular outflow tract. To evaluate reproducibility, two observers applied this methodology to a retrospective series of 49 cardiac MSCT scans in patients with heart failure and significant mitral regurgitation. For each of 25 geometrical metrics, we evaluated inter-observer difference and intra-class correlation. The inter-observer difference was below 10% and the intra-class correlation was above 0.81 for measurements of critical importance in the sizing of TMVR devices: the mitral valve annulus diameters, area, perimeter, the inter-trigone distance, and the aorto-mitral angle. CONCLUSIONS MSCT can provide measurements that are important for patient selection and sizing of TMVR devices. These measurements have excellent inter-observer reproducibility in patients with functional mitral regurgitation.

Bivalirudin Versus Heparin Anticoagulation in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: The Randomized BRAVO-3 Trial.

BACKGROUND Anticoagulation is required during transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) procedures. Although an optimal regimen has not been determined, heparin is mainly used. Direct thrombin inhibition with bivalirudin may be an effective alternative to heparin as the procedural anticoagulant agent in this setting. OBJECTIVES The goal of this study was to determine whether bivalirudin offers an alternative to heparin as the procedural anticoagulant agent in patients undergoing TAVR. METHODS A total of 802 patients with aortic stenosis were randomized to undergo transfemoral TAVR with bivalirudin versus unfractionated heparin during the procedure. The 2 primary endpoints were major bleeding within 48 h or before hospital discharge (whichever occurred first) and 30-day net adverse clinical events, defined as the combination of major adverse cardiovascular events (all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, or stroke) and major bleeding. RESULTS Anticoagulation with bivalirudin versus heparin did not meet superiority because it did not result in significantly lower rates of major bleeding at 48 h (6.9% vs. 9.0%; relative risk: 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.48 to 1.23; p = 0.27) or net adverse cardiovascular events at 30 days (14.4% vs. 16.1%; relative risk: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.64 to 1.24; risk difference: -1.72; 95% CI: -6.70 to 3.25; p = 0.50); regarding the latter, the prespecified noninferiority hypothesis was met (pnoninferiority < 0.01). Rates of major adverse cardiovascular events at 48 h were not significantly different (3.5% vs. 4.8%; relative risk: 0.73; 95% CI: 0.37 to 1.43; p = 0.35). At 48 h, the bivalirudin group had significantly fewer myocardial infarctions but more acute kidney injury events than the heparin group; at 30 days, these differences were no longer significant. CONCLUSIONS In this randomized trial of TAVR procedural pharmacotherapy, bivalirudin did not reduce rates of major bleeding at 48 h or net adverse cardiovascular events within 30 days compared with heparin. Although superiority was not shown, the noninferiority hypothesis was met with respect to the latter factor. Given the lower cost, heparin should remain the standard of care, and bivalirudin can be an alternative anticoagulant option in patients unable to receive heparin in TAVR. (International, Multi-center, Open-label, Randomized Controlled Trial in Patients Undergoing TAVR to Determine the Treatment Effect [Both Safety and Efficacy] of Using Bivalirudin Instead of UFH [BRAVO-2/3]; NCT01651780).

European experience with the second-generation Edwards SAPIEN XT transcatheter heart valve in patients with severe aortic stenosis: 1-year outcomes from the SOURCE XT Registry

OBJECTIVES The SOURCE XT Registry (Edwards SAPIEN XT Aortic Bioprosthesis Multi-Region Outcome Registry) assessed the use and clinical outcomes with the SAPIEN XT (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, California) valve in the real-world setting. BACKGROUND Transcatheter aortic valve replacement is an established treatment for high-risk/inoperable patients with severe aortic stenosis. The SAPIEN XT is a balloon-expandable valve with enhanced features allowing delivery via a lower profile sheath. METHODS The SOURCE XT Registry is a prospective, multicenter, post-approval study. Data from 2,688 patients at 99 sites were analyzed. The main outcome measures were all-cause mortality, stroke, major vascular complications, bleeding, and pacemaker implantations at 30-days and 1 year post-procedure. RESULTS The mean age was 81.4 ± 6.6 years, 42.3% were male, and the mean logistic EuroSCORE (European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation) was 20.4 ± 12.4%. Patients had a high burden of coronary disease (44.2%), diabetes (29.4%), renal insufficiency (28.9%), atrial fibrillation (25.6%), and peripheral vascular disease (21.2%). Survival was 93.7% at 30 days and 80.6% at 1 year. At 30-day follow-up, the stroke rate was 3.6%, the rate of major vascular complications was 6.5%, the rate of life-threatening bleeding was 5.5%, the rate of new pacemakers was 9.5%, and the rate of moderate/severe paravalvular leak was 5.5%. Multivariable analysis identified nontransfemoral approach (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.84; p < 0.0001), renal insufficiency (HR: 1.53; p < 0.0001), liver disease (HR: 1.67; p = 0.0453), moderate/severe tricuspid regurgitation (HR: 1.47; p = 0.0019), porcelain aorta (HR: 1.47; p = 0.0352), and atrial fibrillation (HR: 1.41; p = 0.0014), with the highest HRs for 1-year mortality. Major vascular complications and major/life-threatening bleeding were the most frequently seen complications associated with a significant increase in 1-year mortality. CONCLUSIONS The SOURCE XT Registry demonstrated appropriate use of the SAPIEN XT THV in the first year post-commercialization in Europe. The safety profile is sustained, and clinical benefits have been established in the real-world setting. (SOURCE XT Registry; NCT01238497).

The future of transcatheter mitral valve interventions: competitive or complementary role of repair vs. replacement?

Transcatheter mitral interventions has been developed to address an unmet clinical need and may be an alternative therapeutic option to surgery with the intent to provide symptomatic and prognostic benefit. Beyond MitraClip therapy, alternative repair technologies are being developed to expand the transcatheter intervention armamentarium. Recently, the feasibility of transcatheter mitral valve implantation in native non-calcified valves has been reported in very high-risk patients. Acknowledging the lack of scientific evidence to date, it is difficult to predict what the ultimate future role of transcatheter mitral valve interventions will be. The purpose of the present report is to review the current state-of-the-art of mitral valve intervention, and to identify the potential future scenarios, which might benefit most from the transcatheter repair and replacement devices under development.