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.

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.

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.

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).

Length of the Mitral Isthmus But Not Anatomical Location of Ablation Line Predicts Bidirectional Mitral Isthmus Block in Patients Undergoing Catheter Ablation of Persistent Atrial Fibrillation: A Randomized Controlled Trial

INTRODUCTION Mitral isthmus (MI) ablation is an effective option in patients undergoing ablation for persistent atrial fibrillation (AF). Achieving bidirectional conduction block across the MI is challenging, and predictors of MI ablation success remain incompletely understood. We sought to determine the impact of anatomical location of the ablation line on the efficacy of MI ablation. METHODS AND RESULTS A total of 40 consecutive patients (87% male; 54 ± 10 years) undergoing stepwise AF ablation were included. MI ablation was performed in sinus rhythm. MI ablation was performed from the left inferior PV to either the posterior (group 1) or the anterolateral (group 2) mitral annulus depending on randomization. The length of the MI line (measured with the 3D mapping system) and the amplitude of the EGMs at 3 positions on the MI were measured in each patient. MI block was achieved in 14/19 (74%) patients in group 1 and 15/21 (71%) patients in group 2 (P = NS). Total MI radiofrequency time (18 ± 7 min vs. 17 ± 8 min; P = NS) was similar between groups. Patients with incomplete MI block had a longer MI length (34 ± 6 mm vs. 24 ± 5 mm; P < 0.001), a higher bipolar voltage along the MI (1.75 ± 0.74 mV vs. 1.05 ± 0.69 mV; P < 0.01), and a longer history of continuous AF (19 ± 17 months vs. 10 ± 10 months; P < 0.05). In multivariate analysis, decreased length of the MI was an independent predictor of successful MI block (OR 1.5; 95% CI 1.1-2.1; P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS Increased length but not anatomical location of the MI predicts failure to achieve bidirectional MI block during ablation of persistent AF.

Postmortem magnetic resonance imaging: Reproducing typical autopsy heart measurements

PURPOSE The aim of this study was to evaluate the utility of cardiac postmortem magnetic resonance (PMMR) to perform routine measurements of the ventricular wall thicknesses and the heart valves and to assess if imaging measurements are consistent with traditional autopsy measurements. METHODS In this retrospective study, 25 cases with cardiac PMMR and subsequent autopsy were included. The thicknesses of the myocardial walls as well as the circumferences of all heart valves were measured on cardiac PMMR and compared to autopsy measurements. Paired samples T-test and the Wilcoxon-Signed rank test, were used to compare autopsy and cardiac PMMR measurements. For exploring correlations, the Pearson's Correlation coefficient and the Spearman's Rho test were used. RESULTS Cardiac PMMR measurements of the aortic and pulmonary valve circumferences showed no significant differences from autopsy measurements. The mitral and tricuspid valves circumferences differed significantly from autopsy measurements. Left myocardial and right myocardial wall thickness also differed significantly from autopsy measurements. Left and right myocardial wall thickness, and tricuspid valve circumference measurements on cardiac PMMR and autopsy, correlated strongly and significantly. CONCLUSION Several PMMR measurements of cardiac parameters differ significantly from corresponding autopsy measurements. However, there is a strong correlation between cardiac PMMR measurements and autopsy measurements in the majority of these parameters. It is important to note that myocardial walls are thicker when measured in situ on cardiac PMMR than when measured at autopsy. Investigators using post-mortem MR should be aware of these differences in order to avoid false diagnoses of cardiac pathology based on cardiac PMMR.

Post-Procedural Troponin Elevation and Clinical Outcomes Following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation.

BACKGROUND Biomarkers of myocardial injury increase frequently during transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). The impact of postprocedural cardiac troponin (cTn) elevation on short-term outcomes remains controversial, and the association with long-term prognosis is unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS We evaluated 577 consecutive patients with severe aortic stenosis treated with TAVI between 2007 and 2012. Myocardial injury, defined according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC)-2 as post-TAVI cardiac troponin T (cTnT) >15× the upper limit of normal, occurred in 338 patients (58.1%). In multivariate analyses, myocardial injury was associated with higher risk of all-cause mortality at 30 days (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 8.77; 95% CI, 2.07-37.12; P=0.003) and remained a significant predictor at 2 years (adjusted HR, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.36-2.88; P<0.001). Higher cTnT cutoffs did not add incremental predictive value compared with the VARC-2-defined cutoff. Whereas myocardial injury occurred more frequently in patients with versus without coronary artery disease (CAD), the relative impact of cTnT elevation on 2-year mortality did not differ between patients without CAD (adjusted HR, 2.59; 95% CI, 1.27-5.26; P=0.009) and those with CAD (adjusted HR, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.10-2.65; P=0.018; P for interaction=0.24). Mortality rates at 2 years were lowest in patients without CAD and no myocardial injury (11.6%) and highest in patients with complex CAD (SYNTAX score >22) and myocardial injury (41.1%). CONCLUSIONS VARC-2-defined cTnT elevation emerged as a strong, independent predictor of 30-day mortality and remained a modest, but significant, predictor throughout 2 years post-TAVI. The prognostic value of cTnT elevation was modified by the presence and complexity of underlying CAD with highest mortality risk observed in patients combining SYNTAX score >22 and evidence of myocardial injury.