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.

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).

Cerebral Microembolization During Aortic Valve Replacement Using Minimally Invasive or Conventional Extracorporeal Circulation: A Randomized Trial.

To compare intraoperative cerebral microembolic load between minimally invasive extracorporeal circulation (MiECC) and conventional extracorporeal circulation (CECC) during isolated surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR), we conducted a randomized trial in patients undergoing primary elective SAVR at a tertiary referral hospital. The primary outcome was the procedural phase-related rate of high-intensity transient signals (HITS) on transcranial Doppler ultrasound. HITS rate was used as a surrogate of cerebral microembolism in pre-defined procedural phases in SAVR using MiECC or CECC with (+F) or without (-F) an oxygenator with integrated arterial filter. Forty-eight patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to MiECC or CECC. Due to intraprocedural Doppler signal loss (n = 3), 45 patients were included in final analysis. MiECC perfusion regimen showed a significantly increased HITS rate compared to CECC (by a factor of 1.75; 95% confidence interval, 1.19-2.56). This was due to different HITS rates in procedural phases from aortic cross-clamping until declamping [phase 4] (P = 0.01), and from aortic declamping until stop of extracorporeal perfusion [phase 5] (P = 0.05). Post hoc analysis revealed that MiECC-F generated a higher HITS rate than CECC+F (P = 0.005), CECC-F (P = 0.05) in phase 4, and CECC-F (P = 0.03) in phase 5, respectively. In open-heart surgery, MiECC is not superior to CECC with regard to gaseous cerebral microembolism. When using MiECC for SAVR, the use of oxygenators with integrated arterial line filter appears highly advisable. Only with this precaution, MiECC confers a cerebral microembolic load comparable to CECC during this type of open heart surgery.

Persistent diastolic dysfunction late after valve replacement in severe aortic regurgitation

BACKGROUND: Regression of left ventricular (LV) hypertrophy with normalization of diastolic function has been reported in patients with aortic stenosis late after aortic valve replacement (AVR). The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the effect of AVR on LV function and structure in chronic aortic regurgitation early and late after AVR. METHODS AND RESULTS: Twenty-six patients were included in the present analysis. Eleven patients with severe aortic regurgitation were studied before, early (21 months) and late (89 months) after AVR through the use of LV biplane angiograms, high-fidelity pressure measurements, and LV endomyocardial biopsies. Fifteen healthy subjects were used as controls. LV systolic function was determined from biplane ejection fraction and midwall fractional shortening. LV diastolic function was calculated from the time constant of LV relaxation, peak filling rates, and myocardial stiffness constant. LV structure was assessed from muscle fiber diameter, interstitial fibrosis, and fibrous content. LV muscle mass decreased significantly by 38% early and 55% late after surgery. Ejection fraction was significantly reduced preoperatively and did not change after AVR (P=NS). LV relaxation was significantly prolonged before surgery (89+/-28 ms) but was normalized late after AVR (42+/-14 ms). Early and late peak filling rates were increased preoperatively but normalized postoperatively. Diastolic stiffness constant was increased before surgery (22+/-6 versus 9+/-3 in control subjects; P=0.0003) and remained elevated early and late after AVR (23+/-4; P=0.002). Muscle fiber diameter decreased significantly after AVR but remained increased at late follow-up. Interstitial fibrosis was increased preoperatively and increased even further early but decreased late after AVR. Fibrosis was positively linearly correlated to myocardial stiffness and inversely correlated to LV ejection fraction. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with aortic regurgitation show normalization of macroscopic LV hypertrophy late after AVR, although fiber hypertrophy persists. These changes in LV myocardial structure late after AVR are accompanied by a change in passive elastic properties with persistent diastolic dysfunction.

Risk of acute kidney injury in patients with severe aortic valve stenosis undergoing transcatheter valve replacement

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) for high-risk and inoperable patients with severe aortic stenosis is an emerging procedure in cardiovascular medicine. Little is known of the impact of TAVI on renal function. METHODS: We analysed retrospectively renal baseline characteristics and outcome in 58 patients including 2 patients on chronic haemodialysis undergoing TAVI at our institution. Acute kidney injury (AKI) was defined according to the RIFLE classification. RESULTS: Fifty-eight patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis not considered suitable for conventional surgical valve replacement with a mean age of 83 +/- 5 years underwent TAVI. Two patients died during transfemoral valve implantation and two patients in the first month after TAVI resulting in a 30-day mortality of 6.9%. Vascular access was transfemoral in 46 patients and transapical in 12. Estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) increased in 30 patients (56%). Fifteen patients (28%) developed AKI, of which four patients had to be dialyzed temporarily and one remained on chronic renal replacement therapy. Risk factors for AKI comprised, among others, transapical access, number of blood transfusions, postinterventional thrombocytopaenia and severe inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS). CONCLUSIONS: TAVI is feasible in patients with a high burden of comorbidities and in patients with pre-existing end-stage renal disease who would be otherwise not considered as candidates for conventional aortic valve replacement. Although GFR improved in more than half of the patients, this benefit was associated with a risk of postinterventional AKI. Future investigations should define preventive measures of peri-procedural kidney injury.

Incidence and predictors of atrioventricular conduction impairment after transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Atrioventricular (AV) conduction impairment is well described after surgical aortic valve replacement, but little is known in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). We assessed AV conduction and need for a permanent pacemaker in patients undergoing TAVI with the Medtronic CoreValve Revalving System (MCRS) or the Edwards Sapien Valve (ESV). Sixty-seven patients without pre-existing permanent pacemaker were included in the study. Forty-one patients (61%) and 26 patients (39%) underwent successful TAVI with the MCRS and ESV, respectively. Complete AV block occurred in 15 patients (22%), second-degree AV block in 4 (6%), and new left bundle branch block in 15 (22%), respectively. A permanent pacemaker was implanted in 23 patients (34%). Overall PR interval and QRS width increased significantly after the procedure (p <0.001 for the 2 comparisons). Implantation of the MCRS compared to the ESV resulted in a trend toward a higher rate of new left bundle branch block and complete AV block (29% vs 12%, p = 0.09 for the 2 comparisons). During follow-up, complete AV block resolved in 64% of patients. In multivariable regression analysis pre-existing right bundle branch block was the only independent predictor of complete AV block after TAVI (relative risk 7.3, 95% confidence interval 2.4 to 22.2). In conclusion, TAVI is associated with impairment of AV conduction in a considerable portion of patients, patients with pre-existing right bundle branch block are at increased risk of complete AV block, and complete AV block resolves over time in most patients.

Transapical implantation of a novel self-expanding sutureless aortic valve prosthesis

To date, transapical aortic valve implantation has required a balloon-expandable stented valve prosthesis. More recently, a novel self-expanding sutureless stented bovine pericardial prosthesis has been developed which allows rapid aortic valve replacement via an open transaortic approach in humans. The aim of this animal study was to develop a reliable protocol to facilitate the transapical implantation of this self-expanding valve in a porcine model.

Impact of coronary artery disease and percutaneous coronary intervention on outcomes in patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Coronary artery disease (CAD) is frequently present in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). While revascularisation affects peri-operative outcome in patients undergoing surgical aortic valve replacement, the impact of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients undergoing TAVI is not well established.

Clinical outcomes of patients with estimated low or intermediate surgical risk undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation

AimsTranscatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is an established treatment alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement in high-risk and inoperable patients and outcomes among patients with estimated low or intermediate risk remain to be determined. The aim of this study was to assess clinical outcomes among patients with estimated low or intermediate surgical risk undergoing TAVI.Methods and resultsBetween August 2007 and October 2011, 389 consecutive patients underwent TAVI and were categorized according to the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score into low (STS < 3%; n = 41, 10.5%), intermediate (STS ≥3% and ≤8%, n = 254, 65.3%), and high-risk (STS > 8%; n = 94, 24.2%) groups for the purpose of this study. Significant differences were found between the groups (low risk vs. intermediate risk vs. high risk) for age (78.2 ± 6.7 vs. 82.7 ± 5.7 vs. 83.7 ± 4.9, P < 0.001), body mass index (28.1 ± 6.1 vs. 26.5 ± 4.9 vs. 24.4 ± 4.6, P < 0.001), chronic renal failure (34 vs. 67 vs. 90%, P < 0.001), all-cause mortality at 30 days (2.4 vs. 3.9 vs. 14.9%, P = 0.001), and all-cause mortality at 1 year (10.1 vs. 16.1 vs. 34.5%, P = 0.0003). No differences were observed with regards to cerebrovascular accidents and myocardial infarction during 1-year follow-up.ConclusionIn contemporary practice, TAVI is not limited to inoperable or STS-defined high-risk patients and should be guided by the decision of an interdisciplinary Heart Team. Compared with patients at calculated high risk, well-selected patients with STS-defined intermediate or low risk appear to have favourable clinical outcomes.

Improvement of physical and mental health after transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has emerged as a treatment alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement in elderly high-risk patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis. In this patient population, rapid improvement or restoration of quality of life (QoL) is at least as important as improved clinical outcomes. The purpose of the present study was to assess changes in QoL in response to TAVI.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation: prevention and management of complications

Assessment of elderly patients with severe aortic stenosis and decisions in terms of management strategy (conservative with or without balloon aortic valvuloplasty, transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) or surgical aortic valve replacement) are complex and warrant a multidisciplinary approach involving collaboration between experienced cardiac surgeons, interventional cardiologists, cardiac imaging specialists, anaesthesiologists, geriatricians and a specialised nursing staff. Patient history, comorbid conditions, perioperative risk stratification as well as anatomical and procedural considerations require careful review on an individual, case-by-case basis and have a major impact on treatment allocation. The aims of this article are to provide insights into the fundamental role of appropriate patient screening and selection, and to review the nature, management and prevention of the most important procedural complications associated with the TAVI procedure.