Massive intraoperative thrombus of the aortic arch and proximal descending aorta

A 49-year-old male patient presented with a paravalvular leakage 18 years after aortic valve replacement. The patient received a mechanical valve and was weaned uneventfully from cardiopulmonary bypass. After a drop in the pressure curve of the left radial artery an additional line was placed in the proximal ascending aorta showing normal systemic pressure. Transesophageal echocardiography showed a massive circular thrombosis of the distal aortic arch. The patient received a covered stent to expand the residual aortic lumen and left the hospital in good health.

Unusual cause of myocardial infarction and congestive heart failure in a patient with prosthetic valve endocarditis

In a patient with staphylococcus lugdunensis prosthetic aortic valve endocarditis and coronary septic embolism accompanied by antero-lateral myocardial infarction, embolic material was successfully aspirated from the bifurcation of the left anterior descending coronary artery and the first diagonal branch. A good angiographic result was documented six months thereafter when the patient presented with a second complication, pulsatile compression of the left main coronary artery by an abscess cavity originating between the aortic and mitral annulus, leading to congestive heart failure. The patient underwent successful surgical replacement of the aortic valve prosthesis with concomitant patch reconstruction of the annulus as well as tricuspid annuloplasty.

Predictors of Permanent Pacemaker Implantation in Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis Undergoing TAVR

Background Atrioventricular (AV) conduction disturbances requiring permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation may complicate transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Available evidence on predictors of PPM is sparse and derived from small studies. Objectives The objective of this study was to provide summary effect estimates for clinically useful predictors of PPM implantation after TAVR. Methods We performed a systematic search for studies that reported the incidence of PPM implantation after TAVR and that provided raw data for the predictors of interest. Data on study, patient, and procedural characteristics were abstracted. Crude risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals for each predictor were calculated by use of random effects models. Stratified analyses by type of implanted valve were performed. Results We obtained data from 41 studies that included 11,210 TAVR patients, of whom 17% required PPM implantation after intervention. The rate of PPM ranged from 2% to 51% in individual studies (with a median of 28% for the Medtronic CoreValve Revalving System [MCRS] and 6% for the Edwards SAPIEN valve [ESV]). The summary estimates indicated increased risk of PPM after TAVR for men (RR: 1.23; p < 0.01); for patients with first-degree AV block (RR: 1.52; p < 0.01), left anterior hemiblock (RR: 1.62; p < 0.01), or right bundle branch block (RR: 2.89; p < 0.01) at baseline; and for patients with intraprocedural AV block (RR: 3.49; p < 0.01). These variables remained significant predictors when only patients treated with the MCRS bioprosthesis were considered. The data for ESV were limited. Unadjusted estimates indicated a 2.5-fold higher risk for PPM implantation for patients who received the MCRS than for those who received the ESV. Conclusions Male sex, baseline conduction disturbances, and intraprocedural AV block emerged as predictors of PPM implantation after TAVR. This study provides useful tools to identify high-risk patients and to guide clinical decision making before and after intervention.

Coronary revascularization and TAVI: before, during, after or never?

Aortic valve stenosis and coronary artery disease (CAD) frequently coexist in elderly patients selected for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Therapeutic strategies to manage concomitant obstructive CAD are therefore an important consideration in the overall management of patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) undergoing TAVI. Conventional surgical aortic valve replacement and coronary artery bypass grafting is the treatment of choice for low and intermediate risk patients with symptomatic severe AS and concomitant obstructive CAD. However, TAVI and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are viable alternative options for high-risk or inoperable patients presenting with symptomatic severe AS. PCI has been shown to be feasible and safe in selected high-risk or inoperable patients with symptomatic severe AS. However, the optimal timing of PCI relative to the TAVI procedure has been a subject of debate. The most frequent approch is staged PCI typically performed a few weeks prior to TAVI. However, concomitant PCI has also been shown to be a feasible and safe approach, particularly in patients with a low level of CAD complexity and an absence of severe renal impairment. Conversely, staged PCI should be considered in patients with higher degrees of CAD complexity, particularly in the presence of severe renal impairment. The aim of the present review is to discuss the safety and feasibility of performing PCI in elderly patients with severe AS and the optimal timing of PCI relative to the TAVI procedure using the most up-to-date available evidence.

Assessment of low-flow, low-gradient, severe aortic stenosis: an invasive evaluation is required for decision making.

Low-flow, low-gradient severe aortic stenosis (AS) is characterised by a small aortic valve area (AVA) and low mean gradient (MG) secondary to a low cardiac output and may occur in patients with either a preserved or reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Symptomatic patients presenting with low-flow, low-gradient severe AS have a dismal prognosis independent of baseline LVEF if managed conservatively and should therefore undergo aortic valve replacement if feasible. Transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) is the first-line investigation for the assessment of AS haemodynamic severity. However, when confronted with guideline-discordant AVA (small) and MG (low) values, there are several reasons other than severe AS combined with a low cardiac output which may lead to such a situation, including erroneous measurements, small body size, inherent inconsistencies in the guidelines' criteria, prolonged ejection time and aortic pseudostenosis. The distinction between these various entities poses a diagnostic challenge. However, it is important to make a distinction because each has very different implications in terms of risk stratification and therapeutic management. In such instances, cardiac catheterisation forms an integral part of the work-up of these patients in order to confirm or refute the echocardiographic findings to guide management decisions appropriately.

Preinterventional screening of the TAVI patient: how to choose the suitable patient and the best procedure.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a novel therapy, which has transformed the management of inoperable patients presenting with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis (AS). It is also a proven and less invasive alternative therapeutic option for high-risk symptomatic patients presenting with severe AS who are otherwise eligible for surgical aortic valve replacement. Patient age is not strictly a limitation for TAVI but since this procedure is currently restricted to high-risk and inoperable patients, it follows that most patients selected for TAVI are at an advanced age. Patient frailty and co-morbidities need to be assessed and a clinical judgment made on whether the patient will gain a measureable improvement in their quality of life. Risk stratification has assumed a central role in selecting suitable patients and surgical risk algorithms have proven helpful in this regard. However, limitations exist with these risk models, which must be understood in the context of TAVI. When making final treatment decisions, it is essential that a collaborative multidisciplinary "heart team" be involved and this is stressed in the most recent guidelines of the European Society of Cardiology. Choosing the best procedure is contingent upon anatomical feasibility, and multimodality imaging has emerged as an integral component of the pre-interventional screening process in this regard. The transfemoral route is now considered the default approach although vascular complications remain a concern. A minimal vessel diameter of 6 mm is required for currently commercial available vascular introducer sheaths. Several alternative access routes are available to choose from when confronted with difficult iliofemoral anatomy such as severe peripheral vascular disease or diffuse circumferential vessel calcification. The degree of aortic valve leaflet and annular calcification also needs to be assessed as the latter is a risk factor for post-procedural paravalvular aortic regurgitation. The ultimate goal of patient selection is to achieve the highest procedural success rate while minimizing complications and to choose patients most likely to derive tangible benefit from this procedure.

Pitfalls and premature failure of the Freedom SOLO stentless valve.

OBJECTIVES This study reports a series of pitfalls, premature failures and explantations of the third-generation Freedom SOLO (FS) bovine pericardial stentless valve. METHODS A total of 149 patients underwent aortic valve replacement using the FS. Follow-up was 100% complete with an average observation time of 5.5 ± 2.3 years (maximum 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, 70 and 62%, respectively. Fourteen 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 and severe stenosis, n = 5). Thus, freedom from explantation at 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 years was 95, 94, 91, 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 FS 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.

The Freedom SOLO bovine pericardial stentless valve: Single-center experience, outcome and long-term durability

Abstract Objectives We report our institutional experience and long-term results with the Sorin Freedom SOLO bovine pericardial stentless bioprosthesis. Methods Between January 2005 and November 2009, 149 patients (mean age 73.6±8.7 years, 68 [45.6%] female) underwent isolated (n=75) or combined (n=74) aortic valve replacement (AVR) using the SOLO in our institution. Follow-up was 100% complete with an average follow-up time of 5.9±2.6 years (maximum 9.6 years) and a total of 885.3 patient years. Results Operative (30-day) mortality was 2.7% (1.3% for isolated AVR [n=1] and 4.0% for combined procedures [n=3]). All causes of death were not valve-related. Preoperative peak (mean) gradients of 74.2±23.0 mmHg (48.6 ± 16.3 mmHg) decreased to 15.6±5.4 (8.8±3.0) after AVR, and remained low for up to 9 years. The postoperative effective orifice area (EOA) was 1.6 ±0.57 cm2, 1.90±0.45 cm2, 2.12±0.48 cm2 and 2.20±0.66 cm2 for the valve sizes 21, 23, 25 and 27, respectively; with absence of severe prosthesis-patient-mismatch (PPM) and 0.7% (n=1) moderate PPM. During follow-up, Twenty-six patients experienced structural valve deterioration (SVD) and 14 patients underwent explantation. Kaplan-Meier estimates for freedom from death, explantation and SVD at 9 years averaged 0.57 [0.47‒0.66], 0.82 [0.69‒0.90] and 0.70 [0.57‒0.79], respectively. Conclusions The Freedom SOLO stentless aortic valve is safe to implant and shows excellent early and mid-term hemodynamic performance. However, SVD was observed in a substantial number of patients after only 5 ̶ 6 years and the need for explantation increased markedly, suggesting low durability.

Mitral valve replacement in patients under 65 years of age: mechanical or biological valves?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW There is controversy regarding the optimal choice of prosthetic valves in patients less than 65 years of age requiring mitral valve replacement (MVR). Recently, trends for valve replacement are moving towards biological prosthesis also in younger patients, which is justified by the fact that a later valve-in-valve procedure is feasible in the case of degeneration of the tissue valve. This strategy is increasingly recommended in aortic valve surgery but is questionable for MVR. The purpose of this review is to evaluate current guidelines and analyse evidence for biological MVR in patients under 65 years. RECENT FINDINGS There are differences between guidelines of the American Heart Association and those of the European Society of Cardiology concerning the choice of prostheses in patients undergoing MVR. Although the European Society of Cardiology recommends a mechanical mitral valve in patients under 65 years of age, the American Heart Association does not provide detailed advice for these patients. Mitral valve replacement with biological valves in patients under 65 years is associated with higher rates of reoperation due to structural valve deterioration. In addition, several studies showed a decreased survival after biological MVR. SUMMARY Evidence for biological MVR in patients less than 65 years without comorbidities or contraindication for oral anticoagulation does not exist. Recommendations for patients less than 65 years of age should not be blurred by current 'en-vogue' methods for promising but not yet proven valve-in-valve strategies.

Clinical performance of a sutureless aortic bioprosthesis: five-year results of the 3f Enable long-term follow-up study.

OBJECTIVE Sutureless valves are designed to facilitate surgical implantation, including less-invasive techniques in aortic valve replacement, by maintaining surgical precision of implantation compared with transcatheter techniques. Long-term clinical experience with sutureless valves is lacking. We report the 5-year follow-up results of an international, prospective, multicenter study evaluating the clinical performance and safety of the 3f Enable valve (Medtronic Inc, Minneapolis, Minn). METHODS Between March 2007 and December 2009, 141 patients (54 male; mean age, 76.1±5.7 years) undergoing aortic valve replacement with the 3f Enable valve were enrolled in 10 European sites. The mean follow-up was 2.76 years (range, 2 days to 5.1 years; total, 388.7 patient-years). Echocardiographic valvular hemodynamic and morphologic analyses were performed by an independent core laboratory. RESULTS The mean systolic gradient was 10.4±4.4 mm Hg at discharge and 7.7±4.1 mm Hg at 5 years. The mean effective orifice area was 1.7±0.5 cm2 at discharge and 1.6±0.2 cm2 at 5 years. Freedom from all-cause and valve-related mortality was 87.6%±2.9% and 96.8%±1.6% at 1 year (113 patients at risk) and 77.0%±7.5% and 93.8%±4.8% at 5 years (24 patients at risk), respectively. Six patients underwent reoperation (4 because of major paravalvular leakage and 2 because of endocarditis). Freedom from reoperation was 95.4%±1.9% at 1 year and 95.4%±6.1% at 5 years. No structural valve deterioration occurred during the follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS The sutureless 3f Enable valve represents a safe and effective treatment for aortic valve stenosis, providing an excellent hemodynamic profile. This study represents the longest follow-up study for a sutureless bioprosthesis. Sutureless valves may become an option for all patients with indicated biological aortic valve replacement.

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.

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.

Tomographic PIV behind a prosthetic heart valve

The instantaneous three-dimensional velocity field past a bioprosthetic heart valve was measured using tomographic particle image velocimetry (PIV). Two digital cameras were used together with a mirror setup to record PIV images from four different angles. Measurements were conducted in a transparent silicone phantom with a simplified geometry of the aortic root. The refraction indices of the silicone phantom and the working fluid were matched to minimize optical distortion from the flow field to the cameras. The silicone phantom of the aorta was integrated in a flow loop driven by a piston pump. Measurements were conducted for steady and pulsatile flow conditions. Results of the instantaneous, ensemble and phase averaged flow field are presented. The three-dimensional velocity field reveals a flow topology, which can be related to features of the aortic valve prosthesis.

Indications for treatment in adults with tricuspid valve dysfunction due to a congential cardiac anomaly

The tricuspid valve is frequently affected in adults with congenital heart disease (CHD). Disease of this valve can occur primarily or develop secondary to changes in the right ventricle caused by other defects. Quantitative echocardiographic assessment of tricuspid regurgitation is essential to assess its cause and prognosis. Treatment options vary depending on the underlying defect and right ventricular function. Surgical management of tricuspid valve disease is complex and evolving.