Impact of left ventricular hypertrophy late after aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis on cardiovascular morbidity and mortality

AIMS: The goal of this study was to assess the prevalence of left ventricular (LV) hypertrophy in patients with aortic stenosis late (>6 months) after aortic valve replacement and its impact on cardiac-related morbidity and mortality. METHODS AND RESULTS: In a single tertiary centre, echocardiographic data of LV muscle mass were collected. Detailed information of medical history and angiographic data were gathered. Ninety-nine of 213 patients (46%) had LV hypertrophy late (mean 5.8 +/- 5.4 years) after aortic valve replacement. LV hypertrophy was associated with impaired exercise capacity, higher New York Heart Association dyspnoea class, a tendency for more frequent chest pain expressed as higher Canadian Cardiovascular Society class, and more rehospitalizations. 24% of patients with normal LV mass vs. 39% of patients with LV hypertrophy reported cardiac-related morbidity (p = 0.04). In a multivariate logistic regression model, LV hypertrophy was an independent predictor of cardiac-related morbidity (odds ratio 2.31, 95% CI 1.08 to 5.41), after correction for gender, baseline ejection fraction, and coronary artery disease and its risk factors. Thirty seven deaths occurred during a total of 1959 patient years of follow-up (mean follow-up 9.6 years). Age at aortic valve replacement (hazard ratio 1.85, 95% CI 1.39 to 2.47, for every 5 years increase in age), coexisting coronary artery disease at the time of surgery (hazard ratio 3.36, 95% CI 1.31 to 8.62), and smoking (hazard ratio 4.82, 95% CI 1.72 to 13.45) were independent predictors of overall mortality late after surgery, but not LV hypertrophy. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with aortic valve replacement for isolated aortic stenosis, LV hypertrophy late after surgery is associated with increased morbidity.

A comparison of patient characteristics and 30-day mortality outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation and surgical aortic valve replacement for the treatment of aortic stenosis: a two-centre study

AIMS: It is unclear whether transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) addresses an unmet clinical need for those currently rejected for surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) and whether there is a subgroup of high-risk patients benefiting more from TAVI compared to SAVR. In this two-centre, prospective cohort study, we compared baseline characteristics and 30-day mortality between TAVI and SAVR in consecutive patients undergoing invasive treatment for aortic stenosis. METHODS AND RESULTS: We pre-specified different adjustment methods to examine the effect of TAVI as compared with SAVR on overall 30-day mortality: crude univariable logistic regression analysis, multivariable analysis adjusted for baseline characteristics, analysis adjusted for propensity scores, propensity score matched analysis, and weighted analysis using the inverse probability of treatment (IPT) as weights. A total of 1,122 patients were included in the study: 114 undergoing TAVI and 1,008 patients undergoing SAVR. The crude mortality rate was greater in the TAVI group (9.6% vs. 2.3%) yielding an odds ratio [OR] of 4.57 (95%-CI 2.17-9.65). Compared to patients undergoing SAVR, patients with TAVI were older, more likely to be in NYHA class III and IV, and had a considerably higher logistic EuroSCORE and more comorbid conditions. Adjusted OR depended on the method used to control for confounding and ranged from 0.60 (0.11-3.36) to 7.57 (0.91-63.0). We examined the distribution of propensity scores and found scores to overlap sufficiently only in a narrow range. In patients with sufficient overlap of propensity scores, adjusted OR ranged from 0.35 (0.04-2.72) to 3.17 (0.31 to 31.9). In patients with insufficient overlap, we consistently found increased odds of death associated with TAVI compared with SAVR irrespective of the method used to control confounding, with adjusted OR ranging from 5.88 (0.67-51.8) to 25.7 (0.88-750). Approximately one third of patients undergoing TAVI were found to be potentially eligible for a randomised comparison of TAVI versus SAVR. CONCLUSIONS: Both measured and unmeasured confounding limit the conclusions that can be drawn from observational comparisons of TAVI versus SAVR. Our study indicates that TAVI could be associated with either substantial benefits or harms. Randomised comparisons of TAVI versus SAVR are warranted.

Clinical outcomes of patients with low-flow, low-gradient, severe aortic stenosis and either preserved or reduced ejection fraction undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation

AIMS Our aim was to evaluate the invasive haemodynamic indices of high-risk symptomatic patients presenting with 'paradoxical' low-flow, low-gradient, severe aortic stenosis (AS) (PLF-LG) and low-flow, low-gradient severe AS (LEF-LG) and to compare clinical outcomes following transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) among these challenging AS subgroups. METHODS AND RESULTS Of 534 symptomatic patients undergoing TAVI, 385 had a full pre-procedural right and left heart catheterization. A total of 208 patients had high-gradient severe AS [HGAS; mean gradient (MG) ≥40 mmHg], 85 had PLF-LG [MG ≤ 40 mmHg, indexed aortic valve area [iAVA] ≤0.6 cm(2) m(-2), stroke volume index ≤35 mL/m(2), ejection fraction (EF) ≥50%], and 61 had LEF-LG (MG ≤ 40 mmHg, iAVA ≤0.6 cm(2) m(-2), EF ≤40%). Compared with HGAS, PLF-LG and LEF-LG had higher systemic vascular resistances (HGAS: 1912 ± 654 vs. PLF-LG 2006 ± 586 vs. LEF-LG 2216 ± 765 dyne s m(-5), P = 0.007) but lower valvulo-arterial impedances (HGAS: 7.8 ± 2.7 vs. PLF-LG 6.9 ± 1.9 vs. LEF-LG 7.7 ± 2.5 mmHg mL(-1) m(-2), P = 0.027). At 30 days, no differences in cardiac death (6.5 vs. 4.9 vs. 6.6%, P = 0.90) or death (8.4 vs. 6.1 vs. 6.6%, P = 0.88) were observed among HGAS, PLF-LG, and LEF-LG groups, respectively. At 1 year, New York Heart Association functional improvement occurred in most surviving patients (HGAS: 69.2% vs. PLF-LG 71.7% vs. LEF-LG 89.3%, P = 0.09) and no significant differences in overall mortality were observed (17.6 vs. 20.5 vs. 24.5%, P = 0.67). Compared with HGAS, LEF-LG had a higher 1 year cardiac mortality (adjusted hazard ratio 2.45, 95% confidence interval 1.04-5.75, P = 0.04). CONCLUSION TAVI in PLF-LG or LEF-LG patients is associated with overall mortality rates comparable with HGAS patients and all groups profit symptomatically to a similar extent.

Emergency transcatheter aortic valve implantation for decompensated aortic stenosis

We report the case of an 84-year-old male presenting with syncope and dynamic ST-T wave changes due to decompensated severe valvular aortic stenosis undergoing successful emergency transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

Coronary artery disease severity and aortic stenosis: clinical outcomes according to SYNTAX score in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

AIM The aim of this study was to evaluate whether coronary artery disease (CAD) severity exerts a gradient of risk in patients with aortic stenosis (AS) undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). METHODS AND RESULTS A total of 445 patients with severe AS undergoing TAVI were included into a prospective registry between 2007 and 2012. The preoperative SYNTAX score (SS) was determined from baseline coronary angiograms. In case of revascularization prior to TAVI, residual SS (rSS) was also determined. Clinical outcomes were compared between patients without CAD (n = 158), patients with low SS (0-22, n = 207), and patients with high SS (SS >22, n = 80). The pre-specified primary endpoint was the composite of cardiovascular death, stroke, or myocardial infarction (MI). At 1 year, CAD severity was associated with higher rates of the primary endpoint (no CAD: 12.5%, low SS: 16.1%, high SS: 29.6%; P = 0.016). This was driven by differences in cardiovascular mortality (no CAD: 8.6%, low SS: 13.6%, high SS: 20.4%; P = 0.029), whereas the risk of stroke (no CAD: 5.1%, low SS: 3.3%, high SS: 6.7%; P = 0.79) and MI (no CAD: 1.5%, low SS: 1.1%, high SS: 4.0%; P = 0.54) was similar across the three groups. Patients with high SS received less complete revascularization as indicated by a higher rSS (21.2 ± 12.0 vs. 4.0 ± 4.4, P < 0.001) compared with patients with low SS. High rSS tertile (>14) was associated with higher rates of the primary endpoint at 1 year (no CAD: 12.5%, low rSS: 16.5%, high rSS: 26.3%, P = 0.043). CONCLUSIONS Severity of CAD appears to be associated with impaired clinical outcomes at 1 year after TAVI. Patients with SS >22 receive less complete revascularization and have a higher risk of cardiovascular death, stroke, or MI than patients without CAD or low SS.

Impact of mitral regurgitation on clinical outcomes of patients with low-ejection fraction, low-gradient severe aortic stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

BACKGROUND Up to 1 in 6 patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) present with low-ejection fraction, low-gradient (LEF-LG) severe aortic stenosis and concomitant relevant mitral regurgitation (MR) is present in 30% to 55% of these patients. The effect of MR on clinical outcomes of LEF-LG patients undergoing TAVI is unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS Of 606 consecutive patients undergoing TAVI, 113 (18.7%) patients with LEF-LG severe aortic stenosis (mean gradient ≤40 mm Hg, aortic valve area <1.0 cm(2), left ventricular ejection fraction <50%) were analyzed. LEF-LG patients were dichotomized into ≤mild MR (n=52) and ≥moderate MR (n=61). Primary end point was all-cause mortality at 1 year. No differences in mortality were observed at 30 days (P=0.76). At 1 year, LEF-LG patients with ≥moderate MR had an adjusted 3-fold higher rate of all-cause mortality (11.5% versus 38.1%; adjusted hazard ratio, 3.27 [95% confidence interval, 1.31-8.15]; P=0.011), as compared with LEF-LG patients with ≤mild MR. Mortality was mainly driven by cardiac death (adjusted hazard ratio, 4.62; P=0.005). As compared with LEF-LG patients with ≥moderate MR assigned to medical therapy, LEF-LG patients with ≥moderate MR undergoing TAVI had significantly lower all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 0.38; 95% confidence interval, 0.019-0.75) at 1 year. CONCLUSIONS Moderate or severe MR is a strong independent predictor of late mortality in LEF-LG patients undergoing TAVI. However, LEF-LG patients assigned to medical therapy have a dismal prognosis independent of MR severity suggesting that TAVI should not be withheld from symptomatic patients with LEF-LG severe aortic stenosis even in the presence of moderate or severe MR.

Validation of the Valve Academic Research Consortium Bleeding Definition in Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation.

BACKGROUND The Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC) has proposed a standardized definition of bleeding in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve interventions (TAVI). The VARC bleeding definition has not been validated or compared to other established bleeding definitions so far. Thus, we aimed to investigate the impact of bleeding and compare the predictivity of VARC bleeding events with established bleeding definitions. METHODS AND RESULTS Between August 2007 and April 2012, 489 consecutive patients with severe aortic stenosis were included into the Bern-TAVI-Registry. Every bleeding complication was adjudicated according to the definitions of VARC, BARC, TIMI, and GUSTO. Periprocedural blood loss was added to the definition of VARC, providing a modified VARC definition. A total of 152 bleeding events were observed during the index hospitalization. Bleeding severity according to VARC was associated with a gradual increase in mortality, which was comparable to the BARC, TIMI, GUSTO, and the modified VARC classifications. The predictive precision of a multivariable model for mortality at 30 days was significantly improved by adding the most serious bleeding of VARC (area under the curve [AUC], 0.773; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.706 to 0.839), BARC (AUC, 0.776; 95% CI, 0.694 to 0.857), TIMI (AUC, 0.768; 95% CI, 0.692 to 0.844), and GUSTO (AUC, 0.791; 95% CI, 0.714 to 0.869), with the modified VARC definition resulting in the best predictivity (AUC, 0.814; 95% CI, 0.759 to 0.870). CONCLUSIONS The VARC bleeding definition offers a severity stratification that is associated with a gradual increase in mortality and prognostic information comparable to established bleeding definitions. Adding the information of periprocedural blood loss to VARC may increase the sensitivity and the predictive power of this classification.

Ventricular prosthesis embolization during transapical aortic valve implantation: the role of transesophageal echocardiography in diagnosis and management

The authors present the case of an 81-year-old patient with severe aortic stenosis who experienced left ventricular embolization of an aortic bioprosthesis during transapical aortic valve implantation. The authors discuss reasons for prosthesis embolization and reinforce the attention to technical details and the widespread use of multimodality imaging techniques. In this context, transesophageal echocardiography appears indispensable in the detection and management of procedure-related complications.

Early hemodynamic and neurohormonal response after transcatheter aortic valve implantation

The conventional surgical aortic bioprostheses used for treatment of aortic stenosis (AS) are inherently stenotic in nature. The more favorable mechanical profile of the Medtronic CoreValve bioprosthesis may translate into a better hemodynamic and neurohormonal response.

Clinical outcome and predictors for adverse events after transcatheter aortic valve implantation with the use of different devices and access routes

Background Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a treatment option for high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis. Previous reports focused on a single device or access site, whereas little is known of the combined use of different devices and access sites as selected by the heart team. The purpose of this study is to investigate clinical outcomes of TAVI using different devices and access sites. Methods A consecutive cohort of 200 patients underwent TAVI with the Medtronic CoreValve Revalving system (Medtronic Core Valve LLC, Irvine, CA; n = 130) or the Edwards SAPIEN valve (Edwards Lifesciences LLC, Irvine, CA; n = 70) implanted by either the transfemoral or transapical access route. Results Device success and procedure success were 99% and 95%, respectively, without differences between devices and access site. All-cause mortality was 7.5% at 30 days, with no differences between valve types or access sites. Using multivariable analysis, low body mass index (<20 kg/m2) (odds ratio [OR] 6.6, 95% CI 1.5-29.5) and previous stroke (OR 4.4, 95% CI 1.2-16.8) were independent risk factors for short-term mortality. The VARC-defined combined safety end point occurred in 18% of patients and was driven by major access site complications (8.0%), life-threatening bleeding (8.5%) or severe renal failure (4.5%). Transapical access emerged as independent predictor of adverse outcome for the Valve Academic Research Consortium–combined safety end point (OR 3.3, 95% CI 1.5-7.1). Conclusion A heart team–based selection of devices and access site among patients undergoing TAVI resulted in high device and procedural success. Low body mass index and history of previous stroke were independent predictors of mortality. Transapical access emerged as a risk factor for the Valve Academic Research Consortium–combined safety end point.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation or surgical aortic valve replacement as redo procedure after prior coronary artery bypass grafting

The perioperative risk for redo surgical aortic valve replacement (S-AVR) in patients with severe aortic stenosis and prior coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is increased. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) represents an alternative. We assessed the perioperative and mid-term clinical outcome of patients undergoing S-AVR or TAVI.

Recent developments for surgical aortic valve replacement: the concept of sutureless valve technology

Aortic stenosis has become the most frequent type of valvular heart disease in Europe and North America and presents in the large majority of patients as calcified aortic stenosis in adults of advanced age. Surgical aortic valve replacement has been recognized to be the definitive therapy which improves considerably survival for severe aortic stenosis since more than 40 years. In the most recent period, operative mortality of isolated aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis varies between 1–3% in low-risk patients younger than 70 years and between 4 and 8% in selected older adults. Long-term survival following aortic valve replacement is close to that observed in a control population of similar age. Numerous observational studies have consistently demonstrated that corrective surgery in symptomatic patients is invariably followed by a subjective improvement in quality of life and a substantial increase in survival rates. More recently, transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has been demonstrated to be feasible in patients with high surgical risk using either a retrograde transfemoral or transsubclavian approach or an antegrade, transapical access. Reported 30-day mortality ranges between 5 and 15%) and is acceptable when compared to the risk predicted by the logistic EuroSCORE (varying between 20 and 35%) and the STS Score, although the EuroScore has been shown to markedly overestimate the effective operative risk. One major concern remains the high rate of paravalvular regurgitation which is observed in up to 85% of the patients and which requires further follow-up and critical evaluation. In addition, long-term durability of these valves with a focus on the effects of crimping remains to be addressed, although 3-5 year results are promising. Sutureless biological valves were designed to simplify and significantly accelerate the surgical replacement of a diseased valve and allow complete excision of the calcified native valve. Until now, there are 3 different sutureless prostheses that have been approved. The 3f Enable valve from ATS-Medtronic received CE market approval in 2010, the Perceval S from Sorin during Q1 of 2011 and the intuity sutureless prosthesis from Edwards in 2012. All these devices aim to facilitate valve surgery and therefore have the potential to decrease the invasivness and to shorten the conventional procedure without compromise in term of excision of the diseased valve. This review summarizes the history and the current knowledge of sutureless valve technology.