Cirurgia de revascularização miocárdica na fase aguda do infarto: análise dos fatores preditores de mortalidade intra-hospitalar

OBJETIVO: A cirurgia de revascularização miocárdica (CRM) na fase aguda do infarto do miocárdio (IAM) está associada a aumento do risco operatório. O objetivo do estudo foi determinar fatores preditores de mortalidade intra-hospitalar nos pacientes submetidos a CRM no IAM. MÉTODOS: Durante três anos, todos os pacientes submetidos a CRM no IAM foram analisados retrospectivamente, utilizando o banco de dados institucional. Sessenta variáveis por paciente foram avaliadas: 49 variáveis pré-operatórias provenientes dos escores 2000 Bernstein-Parsonnet e EuroSCORE; 4 variáveis pré-operatórias não consideradas por esses escores (tempo entre o IAM e a CRM, valor máximo de CKMB, valor máximo de troponina e supradesnivelamento do segmento ST) e 7 variáveis intraoperatórias [uso de circulação extracorpórea (CEC), tempo de CEC, tipo de cardioplegia, endarterectomia, número de enxertos, uso da artéria torácica interna e revascularização completa]. Análise univariada e multivariada para o desfecho mortalidade intra-hospitalar foram realizadas. RESULTADOS: O tempo médio entre o IAM e a CRM foi de 3,8 ± 3 dias. A mortalidade global foi 19%. Na análise multivariada: idade > 65 anos [OR 16,5 (IC 1,8-152), P=0,013]~ CEC >108 minutos [OR 40 (IC 2,7-578), P=0,007], creatinina > 2 mg/dl [OR 35,5 (IC 1,7-740), P=0,021] e pressão pulmonar sistólica > 60 mmHg [OR 31(IC 1,6-591), P=0,022] foram preditores de mortalidade intra-hospitalar. CONCLUSÃO: Variáveis pré-operatórias clássicas como idade > 65 anos, creatinina > 2 mg/dl e pressão pulmonar sistólica > 60 mmHg foram preditoras de mortalidade intra-hospitalar nos pacientes operados de revascularização miocárdica na fase aguda do infarto.

Com ou sem CEC?: impacto dos escores de risco na cirurgia de revascularização miocárdica

OBJETIVO: Permanecem as controvérsias sobre a utilização de circulação extracorpórea (CEC) na cirurgia de revascularização miocárdica (CRM). O objetivo deste estudo foi avaliar o impacto do 2000 Bernstein Parsonnet (2000BP) e EuroSCORE (EU) para escolha de CEC na CRM. MÉTODOS: Foram submetidos à CRM 1.551 pacientes consecutivos. CEC foi utilizada em 1.121 (72,3%) pacientes. O desempenho do 2000BP e EU para a amostra foi avaliado mediante testes de calibração, discriminação e correlação. Para ambos os escores de risco, o aumento do valor do escore e a presença de CEC tiveram relação direta com maior chance de óbito (P<0,05). Portanto, com essas duas variáveis foi construído um modelo de regressão logística para cada escore de risco, com a finalidade de determinar em que valor do escore a presença de CEC aumenta significativamente a chance de óbito. RESULTADOS: A calibração, ao igual que a área abaixo da curva ROC para o grupo com CEC [2000BP=0,80; EU=0,78] e sem CEC [2000BP=0,81; EU=0,85] foram adequadas. A correlação de Spearman para os grupos com e sem CEC foi de 0,66 (P<0,001) e 0,62 (P<0,001), respectivamente. No 2000BP, para um valor>17,75, a presença de CEC aumentou a chance de óbito para 7,4 [IC95% (4,4-12,3), P<0,0001]. No EU, para um valor>4,5, a presença de CEC aumentou a chance de óbito para 5,4 [IC95% (3,3-9), P<0,0001]. CONCLUSÃO: Na tomada de decisões, o 2000BP>17,75 ou o EU>4,5 orientam a identificar pacientes que quando submetidos a CRM com CEC têm chance de óbito aumentada significativamente.

Balloon Aortic Valvuloplasty as Bridge-to-Decision in High Risk Patients with Severe Aortic Valve Stenosis

Background. A sizable group of patients with symptomatic aortic stenosis (AS) can undergo neither surgical aortic valve replacement (AVR) nor transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) because of clinical contraindications. The aim of this study was to assess the potential role of balloon aortic valvuloplasty (BAV) as a “bridge-to-decision” in selected patients with severe AS and potentially reversible contraindications to definitive treatment. Methods. We retrospectively enrolled 645 patients who underwent first BAV at our Institution between July 2007 and December 2012. Of these, the 202 patients (31.2%) who underwent BAV as bridge-to-decision (BTD) requiring clinical re-evaluation represented our study population. BTD patients were further subdivided in 5 groups: low left ventricular ejection fraction; mitral regurgitation grade ≥3; frailty; hemodynamic instability; comorbidity. The main objective of the study was to evaluate how BAV influenced the final treatment strategy in the whole BTD group and in its single specific subgroups. Results. Mean logistic EuroSCORE was 23.5±15.3%, mean age was 81±7 years. Mean transaortic gradient decreased from 47±17 mmHg to 33±14 mmHg. Of the 193 patients with BTD-BAV who received a second heart team evaluation, 72.5% were finally deemed eligible for definitive treatment (25.4%for AVR; 47.2% for TAVI): respectively, 96.7% of patients with left ventricular ejection fraction recovery; 70.5% of patients with mitral regurgitation reduction; 75.7% of patients who underwent BAV in clinical hemodynamic instability; 69.2% of frail patients and 68% of patients who presented relevant comorbidities. 27.5% of the study population was deemed ineligible for definitive treatment and treated with standard therapy/repeated BAV. In-hospital mortality was 4.5%, cerebrovascular accident occurred in 1% and overall vascular complications were 4% (0.5% major; 3.5% minor). Conclusions. Balloon aortic valvuloplasty should be considered as bridge-to-decision in high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis who cannot be immediate candidates for definitive percutaneous or surgical treatment.

Absence of prosthesis-patient mismatch with the new generation of Edwards stented aortic bioprosthesis

Prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) remains a controversial issue with the most recent stented biological valves. We analyzed the incidence of PPM after implantation of the Carpentier-Edwards Perimount Magna Ease aortic valve (PMEAV) bioprosthesis and assessed the early clinical outcome. Two hundred and seventy consecutive patients who received a PMEAV bioprosthesis between January 2007 and July 2008 were analyzed. Pre-, peri- and postoperative data were assessed and echocardiographic as well as clinical follow-up was performed. Mean age was 72+/-9 years, 168 (62.2%) were males. Fifty-seven patients (21.1%) were below 65 years of age. Absence of PPM, corresponding to an indexed effective orifice area >0.85 cm(2)/m(2), was 99.5%. Observed in-hospital mortality was 2.2% (six patients), with a predicted mortality according to the additive EuroSCORE of 7.6+/-3.1%. At echocardiographic assessment after a mean follow-up period of 150+/-91 days, mean transvalvular gradient was 11.8+/-4.8 mmHg (all valve sizes). No paravalvular leakage was seen. Nine patients died during follow-up. The Carpentier-Edwards PMEAV bioprosthesis shows excellent hemodynamic performance. This valve can be implanted in all sizes with an incidence of severe PPM below 0.5%.

Clinical outcome of high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction undergoing medical treatment or TAVI

Introduction Reduced left ventricular function in patients with severe symptomatic valvular aortic stenosis is associated with impaired clinical outcome in patients undergoing surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (TAVI) has been shown non-inferior to SAVR in high-risk patients with respect to mortality and may result in faster left ventricular recovery. Methods We investigated clinical outcomes of high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing medical treatment (n = 71) or TAVI (n = 256) stratified by left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in a prospective single center registry. Results Twenty-five patients (35%) among the medical cohort were found to have an LVEF≤30% (mean 26.7±4.1%) and 37 patients (14%) among the TAVI patients (mean 25.2±4.4%). Estimated peri-interventional risk as assessed by logistic EuroSCORE was significantly higher in patients with severely impaired LVEF as compared to patients with LVEF>30% (medical/TAVI 38.5±13.8%/40.6±16.4% versus medical/TAVI 22.5±10.8%/22.1±12.8%, p <0.001). In patients undergoing TAVI, there was no significant difference in the combined endpoint of death, myocardial infarction, major stroke, life-threatening bleeding, major access-site complications, valvular re-intervention, or renal failure at 30 days between the two groups (21.0% versus 27.0%, p = 0.40). After TAVI, patients with LVEF≤30% experienced a rapid improvement in LVEF (from 25±4% to 34±10% at discharge, p = 0.002) associated with improved NYHA functional class at 30 days (decrease ≥1 NYHA class in 95%). During long-term follow-up no difference in survival was observed in patients undergoing TAVI irrespective of baseline LVEF (p = 0.29), whereas there was a significantly higher mortality in medically treated patients with severely reduced LVEF (log rank p = 0.001). Conclusion TAVI in patients with severely reduced left ventricular function may be performed safely and is associated with rapid recovery of systolic left ventricular function and heart failure symptoms.

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.

Predictors of functional decline in elderly patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI)

Aims This study aimed to assess functional course in elderly patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and to find predictors of functional decline. Methods and results In this prospective cohort, functional course was assessed in patients ≥70 years using basic activities of daily living (BADL) before and 6 months after TAVI. Baseline EuroSCORE, STS score, and a frailty index (based on assessment of cognition, mobility, nutrition, instrumental and basic activities of daily living) were evaluated to predict functional decline (deterioration in BADL) using logistic regression models. Functional decline was observed in 22 (20.8%) of 106 surviving patients. EuroSCORE (OR per 10% increase 1.18, 95% CI: 0.83-1.68, P = 0.35) and STS score (OR per 5% increase 1.64, 95% CI: 0.87-3.09, P = 0.13) weakly predicted functional decline. In contrast, the frailty index strongly predicted functional decline in univariable (OR per 1 point increase 1.57, 95% CI: 1.20-2.05, P = 0.001) and bivariable analyses (OR: 1.56, 95% CI: 1.20-2.04, P = 0.001 controlled for EuroSCORE; OR: 1.53, 95% CI: 1.17-2.02, P = 0.002 controlled for STS score). Overall predictive performance was best for the frailty index [Nagelkerke's R(2) (NR(2)) 0.135] and low for the EuroSCORE (NR(2) 0.015) and STS score (NR(2) 0.034). In univariable analyses, all components of the frailty index contributed to the prediction of functional decline. Conclusion Over a 6-month period, functional status worsened only in a minority of patients surviving TAVI. The frailty index, but not established risk scores, was predictive of functional decline. Refinement of this index might help to identify patients who potentially benefit from additional geriatric interventions after TAVI.

Quality of life in high-risk patients: comparison of transcatheter aortic valve implantation with surgical aortic valve replacement

OBJECTIVES To compare health-related quality of life (QoL) in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation via transapical access (TA TAVI) with patients undergoing surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). METHODS One hundred and forty-four high-risk patients referred for aortic valve replacement underwent TAVI screening and were assigned to either TA TAVI (n = 51, age 79.7 ± 9.2 years, logistic EuroSCORE 26.5 ± 16.1%, 51% males) or SAVR (n = 93, age 81.1 ± 5.3 years, logistic EuroSCORE 12.1 ± 9.3%, 42% males) by the interdisciplinary heart team. QoL was assessed using the Short Form 36 (SF-36) Health Survey Questionnaire and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Furthermore, current living conditions and the degree of independence at home were evaluated. RESULTS Patients undergoing TA TAVI were at higher risk as assessed by EuroSCORE (26.5 ± 16 vs. 12.1 ± 9, P < 0.001) and STS score (6.7 ± 4 vs. 4.4 ± 3, P < 0.001) compared with SAVR patients. At the 30-day follow-up, the rate of mortality was similar and amounted to 7.8% for TA TAVI and 7.5% for SAVR patients and raised to 25.5% in TA TAVI and 18.3% in SAVR patients after a follow-up period of 15 ± 10 months. Assessment of QoL revealed no differences in terms of anxiety and depression between TA TAVI and SAVR patients. The SF-36 mental health metascore was similar in both groups (65.6 ± 19 vs. 68.8 ± 22, P = 0.29), while a significant difference was observed in the physical health metascore (49.7 ± 21 vs. 62.0 ± 21, P = 0.015). After adjustment for baseline characteristics, this difference disappeared. However, every added point in the preoperative risk assessment with the STS score decreased the SF-36 physical health dimension by two raw points at the follow-up assessment. CONCLUSIONS Selected high-risk patients undergoing TAVI by using a transapical access achieve similar clinical outcomes and QoL compared with patients undergoing SAVR. Increased STS scores predict worse QoL outcomes.

Long-term results after proximal thoracic aortic redo surgery

Objective: To evaluate early and mid-term results in patients undergoing proximal thoracic aortic redo surgery. Methods: We analyzed 60 patients (median age 60 years, median logistic EuroSCORE 40) who underwent proximal thoracic aortic redo surgery between January 2005 and April 2012. Outcome and risk factors were analyzed. Results: In hospital mortality was 13%, perioperative neurologic injury was 7%. Fifty percent of patients underwent redo surgery in an urgent or emergency setting. In 65%, partial or total arch replacement with or without conventional or frozen elephant trunk extension was performed. The preoperative logistic EuroSCORE I confirmed to be a reliable predictor of adverse outcome- (ROC 0.786, 95%CI 0.64–0.93) as did the new EuroSCORE II model: ROC 0.882 95%CI 0.78–0.98. Extensive individual logistic EuroSCORE I levels more than 67 showed an OR of 7.01, 95%CI 1.43–34.27. A EuroSCORE II larger than 28 showed an OR of 4.44 (95%CI 1.4–14.06). Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified a critical preoperative state (OR 7.96, 95%CI 1.51–38.79) but not advanced age (OR 2.46, 95%CI 0.48–12.66) as the strongest independent predictor of in-hospital mortality. Median follow-up was 23 months (1–52 months). One year and five year actuarial survival rates were 83% and 69% respectively. Freedom from reoperation during follow-up was 100%. Conclusions: Despite a substantial early attrition rate in patients presenting with a critical preoperative state, proximal thoracic aortic redo surgery provides excellent early and mid-term results. Higher EuroSCORE I and II levels and a critical preoperative state but not advanced age are independent predictors of in-hospital mortality. As a consequence, age alone should no longer be regarded as a contraindication for surgical treatment in this particular group of patient

Minimal extracorporeal circulation is a promising technique for coronary artery bypass grafting

BACKGROUND: Minimal extracorporeal circulation (MECC) is a promising perfusion technology, taking the advantage of an ECC while having a significantly reduced priming volume. We analyzed the actual possible benefits of using MECC in patients undergoing CABG procedures and compared the results with conventional extracorporeal circulation (CECC). METHODS: One thousand fifty-three consecutive patients underwent CABG surgery using the MECC perfusion technique. Subgroup analyses focused on perioperative myocardial markers (cardiac troponin I [cTnI]), incidence of atrial fibrillation (AF), and perioperative evaluation of inflammatory markers and data were compared with those of patients who underwent CABG using CECC. A propensity score analysis was performed. RESULTS: Patient characteristics and distribution of EuroSCORE risk were similar in both groups. Severity of coronary artery disease and extent of revascularization were also comparable in both groups (number of distal anastomoses: 3.2 +/- 1.1 in CECC vs 3.2 +/- 0.9 in MECC; p = not significant [ns]). The cTnI was significantly lower in the MECC group (11.0 +/- 10.8 microg/L in MECC vs 24.7 +/- 25.3 microg/L in CECC; p < 0.05). Incidence of AF was 11.1% in MECC and 39.0% in CECC (p < 0.05). Inflammatory markers (interleukin-6, SC5b-9) were lower in MECC patients (p < 0.05). Propensity score analysis confirmed faster recovery in MECC patients and lower incidence of AF. CONCLUSIONS: Minimal extracorporeal circulation is a safe perfusion technique for CABG and may therefore concurrence OPCAB and traditional CABG under CECC.

Minimized cardiopulmonary bypass combined with a smart suction device: the future of cardiopulmonary bypass?

OBJECTIVE: The standard heart-lung machine is a major trigger of systemic inflammatory response and the morbidity attributed to conventional extracorporeal circulation (CECC) is still significant. Reduction of blood-artificial surface contact and reduction of priming volume are principal aims in minimized extracorporeal circulation (MECC) cardiopulmonary bypass systems. The aim of this paper is to give an overview of the literature and to present our experience with the MECC-smart suction system. METHODS AND RESULTS: At our institution, 1799 patients underwent isolated coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgery, 1372 with a MECC-smart suction system and 427 with CECC. All in-hospital data were assessed and the results were compared between the 2 groups. Patient characteristics and the distribution of EuroSCORE risk profile in our collective were similar between both groups. Average age in the MECC collective was 67.5 +/- 11.4 years and average EuroSCORE was 5.0 +/- 1.5. Average number of distal anastomoses was similar to the average number encountered in patients undergoing CABG surgery with CECC (3.3 +/- 1.0 for MECC versus 3.2 +/- 1.1 for CECC; P = ns). Myocardial protection is superior in MECC patients with lower postoperative maximal cTnI values (11.0 +/- 10.8 micromol/L for MECC versus 24.7 +/- 25.3 micromol/L for CECC; P < .05). Postoperative recovery was faster in patients operated on with the MECC-smart suction system and discharge from the hospital was earlier than for CECC patients (7.4 +/- 1.9 days for MECC versus 8.8 +/- 3.8 days for CECC; P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: The MECC-smart suction system is a safe perfusion technique for CABG surgery. In patients operated on with this system, the clinical outcome seems to be better than in patients operated on with CECC. This promising and less damaging perfusion technology has the potential to replace CECC systems in CABG surgery.

Percutaneous aortic valve replacement for severe aortic stenosis in high-risk patients using the second- and current third-generation self-expanding CoreValve prosthesis: device success and 30-day clinical outcome

OBJECTIVES: We sought to determine both the procedural performance and safety of percutaneous implantation of the second (21-French [F])- and third (18-F)-generation CoreValve aortic valve prosthesis (CoreValve Inc., Irvine, California). BACKGROUND: Percutaneous aortic valve replacement represents an emerging alternative therapy for high-risk and inoperable patients with severe symptomatic aortic valve stenosis. METHODS: Patients with: 1) symptomatic, severe aortic valve stenosis (area <1 cm2); 2) age > or =80 years with a logistic EuroSCORE > or =20% (21-F group) or age > or =75 years with a logistic EuroSCORE > or =15% (18-F group); or 3) age > or =65 years plus additional prespecified risk factors were included. Introduction of the 18-F device enabled the transition from a multidisciplinary approach involving general anesthesia, surgical cut-down, and cardiopulmonary bypass to a truly percutaneous approach under local anesthesia without hemodynamic support. RESULTS: A total of 86 patients (21-F, n = 50; 18-F, n = 36) with a mean valve area of 0.66 +/- 0.19 cm2 (21-F) and 0.54 +/- 0.15 cm2 (18-F), a mean age of 81.3 +/- 5.2 years (21-F) and 83.4 +/- 6.7 years (18-F), and a mean logistic EuroSCORE of 23.4 +/- 13.5% (21-F) and 19.1 +/- 11.1% (18-F) were recruited. Acute device success was 88%. Successful device implantation resulted in a marked reduction of aortic transvalvular gradients (mean pre 43.7 mm Hg vs. post 9.0 mm Hg, p < 0.001) with aortic regurgitation grade remaining unchanged. Acute procedural success rate was 74% (21-F: 78%; 18-F: 69%). Procedural mortality was 6%. Overall 30-day mortality rate was 12%; the combined rate of death, stroke, and myocardial infarction was 22%. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of severe aortic valve stenosis in high-risk patients with percutaneous implantation of the CoreValve prosthesis is feasible and associated with a lower mortality rate than predicted by risk algorithms.

Procedural and 30-day outcomes following transcatheter aortic valve implantation using the third generation (18 Fr) corevalve revalving system: results from the multicentre, expanded evaluation registry 1-year following CE mark approval

AIMS: To describe the procedural performance and 30-day outcomes following implantation using the 18 Fr CoreValve Revalving System (CRS) as part of the multicentre, expanded evaluation registry, 1-year after obtaining CE mark approval. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis and logistic Euroscore > or =15%, or age > or =75 years, or age > or =65 years associated with pre-defined risk factors, and for whom a physician proctor and a clinical specialist were in attendance during the implantation and who collected the clinical data, were included. From April 2007, to April 2008, 646 patients with a mean age of 81 +/- 6.6 years, mean aortic valve area 0.6 +/- 0.2 cm2, and logistic EuroSCORE of 23.1 +/- 13.8% were recruited. After valve implantation, the mean transaortic valve gradient decreased from 49.4 +/- 13.9 to 3 +/- 2 mmHg. All patients had paravalvular aortic regurgitation < or = grade 2. The rate of procedural success was 97%. The procedural mortality rate was 1.5%. At 30 days, the all-cause mortality rate (i.e, including procedural) was 8% and the combined rate of death, stroke and myocardial infarction was 9.3%. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study demonstrate the high rate of procedural success and a low 30-day mortality in a large cohort of high-risk patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with the CRS.

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.

Unprotected left main stenting in the real world: two-year outcomes of the French left main taxus registry

BACKGROUND: Cardiac surgery is the reference treatment for patients with left main (LM) disease, although percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents is emerging as a possible alternative. The objective of this registry was to evaluate the 2-year outcome of elective percutaneous coronary intervention for unprotected LM disease with paclitaxel-eluting stents. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 291 patients were prospectively included from 4 centers. Acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock were the only exclusion criteria. Patients were 69+/-11 years old, 29% were diabetic, and 25% had 3-vessel disease. For distal LM lesions (78%), the provisional side-branch T-stenting approach was used in 92% of cases and final kissing balloon inflation in 97%. Angiographic success was obtained in 99.7% of cases. At 2-year follow-up, the total cardiac death rate was 5.4% (1 EuroSCORE point was associated with a 15% [95% confidence interval 2.9% to 28.2%, P=0.013] higher risk of cardiac death), target-lesion revascularization was 8.7%, and incidence of Q-wave or non-Q-wave myocardial infarction was 0.9% and 3.1%, respectively. The combined end point occurred in 15.8% of cases and stroke in 0.7%. The incidence of definite and probable LM stent thrombosis was 0.7%, whereas the incidence of any stent thrombosis was 3.8%, with a higher risk in patients with side-branch stenting in the presence of LM bifurcation lesions (hazard ratio 9.6, 95% confidence interval 1.2 to 77.7, P=0.035). CONCLUSIONS: Unprotected LM stenting with paclitaxel-eluting stents, with a strategy of provisional side-branch T-stenting for distal lesions, provides excellent acute angiographic results and good mid-term clinical outcomes, with a 15.8% rate of major adverse cardiac events at 2-year follow-up.