Mid-term results of aortic root replacement using a self-assembled biological composite graft.

OBJECTIVES To report the mid-term results of aortic root replacement using a self-assembled biological composite graft, consisting of a vascular tube graft and a stented tissue valve. METHODS Between January 2005 and December 2011, 201 consecutive patients [median age 66 (interquartile range, IQR, 55-77) years, 31 female patients (15.4%), median logistic EuroSCORE 10 (IQR 6.8-23.2)] underwent aortic root replacement using a stented tissue valve for the following indications: annulo-aortic ectasia or ascending aortic aneurysm with aortic valve disease in 162 (76.8%) patients, active infective endocarditis in 18 (9.0%) and acute aortic dissection Stanford type A in 21 (10.4%). All patients underwent clinical and echocardiographic follow-up. We analysed survival and valve-related events. RESULTS The overall in-hospital mortality rate was 4.5%. One- and 5-year cardiac-related mortality rates were 3 and 6%, and overall survival was 95 ± 1.5 and 75 ± 3.6%, respectively. The rate of freedom from structural valve failure was 99% and 97 ± 0.4% at the 1- and 5-year follow-up, respectively. The incidence rates of prosthetic valve endocarditis were 3 and 4%, respectively. During a median follow-up of 28 (IQR 14-51) months, only 2 (1%) patients required valve-related redo surgery due to prosthetic valvular endocarditis and none suffered from thromboembolic events. One percent of patients showed structural valve deterioration without any clinical symptoms; none of the patients suffered greater than mild aortic regurgitation. CONCLUSIONS Aortic root replacement using a self-assembled biological composite graft is an interesting option. Haemodynamic results are excellent, with freedom from structured valve failure. Need for reoperation is extremely low, but long-term results are necessary to prove the durability of this concept.

Is surgery in acute aortic dissection type A still contraindicated in the presence of preoperative neurological symptoms?

OBJECTIVES Severe neurological deficit (ND) due to acute aortic dissection type A (AADA) was considered a contraindication for surgery because of poor prognosis. Recently, more aggressive indication for surgery despite neurological symptoms has shown acceptable postoperative clinical results. The aim of this study was to evaluate early and mid-term outcomes of patients with AADA presenting with acute ND. METHODS Data from 53 patients with new-onset ND who received surgical repair for AADA between 2005 and 2012 at our institution were retrospectively reviewed. ND was defined as focal motor or sensory deficit, hemiplegia, paraplegia, convulsions or coma. Neurological symptoms were evaluated preoperatively using the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) and modified Rankin Scale (mRS), and at discharge as well as 3-6 months postoperatively using the mRS and National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale. Involvement of carotid arteries was assessed in the pre- and postoperative computed tomography. Logistic regression analysis was performed to detect predictive factors for recovery of ND. RESULTS Of the 53 patients, 29 (54.7%) showed complete recovery from focal ND at follow-up. Neurological symptoms persisted in 24 (45.3%) patients, of which 8 (33%) died without neurological assessment at follow-up. Between the two groups (patients with recovery and those with persisting ND), there was no significant difference regarding the duration of hypothermic circulatory arrest (28 ± 14 vs 36 ± 20 min) or severely reduced consciousness (GCS <8). Multivariate analysis showed significant differences for the preoperative mRS between the two groups (P < 0.007). A high preoperative mRS was associated with persistence of neurological symptoms (P < 0.02). Cardiovascular risk factors, age or involvement of supra-aortic branches were not predictive for persistence of ND. CONCLUSION More than half of our patients recovered completely from ND due to AADA after surgery. Severity of clinical symptoms had a predictive value. Patients suffering from AADA and presenting with ND before surgery should not be excluded from emergency surgery.

Outcome of aortic surgery in patients with Loeys-Dietz syndrome primarily treated as having Marfan syndrome.

OBJECTIVES Loeys-Dietz syndrome (LDS) is characterized by acute aortic dissection (AAD) at aortic diameters below thresholds for intervention in patients with Marfan syndrome (MFS). The aim was to evaluate the outcome of LDS patients primarily treated as having MFS. METHODS We analysed 68 consecutive patients who underwent surgery between 1995 and 2007 under the assumption of having MFS before retrospectively being screened for LDS when genetic testing became available. These patients were followed up until 2013, and underwent a total of 115 aortic surgeries. RESULTS Genetic testing was performed in 76% of the patients. Sixty per cent of these patients were positive for FBN1 mutations associated with MFS, 20% had no FBN1 mutation and 17% harboured TGFBR1/2 mutations associated with LDS. Mean follow-up was 12.7 ± 7 years. All-cause 30-day, 6-month and 1-year mortality rates were 2.9, 4.4 and 7.3%, respectively. Interestingly, initial presentation with AAD did not differ between LDS and MFS (33 vs 37%, P = 0.48) nor did long-term mortality compared with MFS patients (11 vs 16%, P = 1.0) or within MFS subgroups (FBN1 positive 13%, P = 1.0; FBN1 negative 10%, P = 1.0; not tested 25%, P = 0.62). There was no difference in the need for secondary total arch replacement between LDS and MFS patients (11 vs 14%, P = 1.0), nor within MFS subgroups (FBN1 positive 16%, P = 1.0; FBN1 negative 10%, P = 1.0; not tested 13%, P = 1.0). Total aortic replacement became necessary in 22% of LDS compared with 12% of MFS patients (P = 0.6) and did not differ significantly between MFS subgroups. CONCLUSIONS Although early surgical intervention in LDS is warranted to avoid AAD, the current data suggest that once the diseased segment is repaired, there seems to be no additional burden in terms of mortality or reoperation rate compared with that in MFS patients, with or without confirmed FBN1 mutation.

Decision-making in aortic root surgery in Marfan syndrome: bleeding, thromboembolism and risk of reintervention after valve-sparing or mechanical aortic root replacement†

OBJECTIVES Valve-sparing root replacement (VSRR) is thought to reduce the rate of thromboembolic and bleeding events compared with aortic root replacement using a mechanical aortic root replacement (MRR) with a composite graft by avoiding oral anticoagulation. But as VSRR carries a certain risk for subsequent reinterventions, decision-making in the individual patient can be challenging. METHODS Of 100 Marfan syndrome (MFS) patients who underwent 169 aortic surgeries and were followed at our institution since 1995, 59 consecutive patients without a history of dissection or prior aortic surgery underwent elective VSRR or MRR and were retrospectively analysed. RESULTS VSRR was performed in 29 (David n = 24, Yacoub n = 5) and MRR in 30 patients. The mean age was 33 ± 15 years. The mean follow-up after VSRR was 6.5 ± 4 years (180 patient-years) compared with 8.8 ± 9 years (274 patient-years) after MRR. Reoperation rates after root remodelling (Yacoub) were significantly higher than after the reimplantation (David) procedure (60 vs 4.2%, P = 0.01). The need for reinterventions after the reimplantation procedure (0.8% per patient-year) was not significantly higher than after MRR (P = 0.44) but follow-up after VSRR was significantly shorter (P = 0.03). There was neither significant morbidity nor mortality associated with root reoperations. There were no neurological events after VSRR compared with four stroke/intracranial bleeding events in the MRR group (log-rank, P = 0.11), translating into an event rate of 1.46% per patient-year following MRR. CONCLUSION The calculated annual failure rate after VSRR using the reimplantation technique was lower than the annual risk for thromboembolic or bleeding events. Since the perioperative risk of reinterventions following VSRR is low, patients might benefit from VSRR even if redo surgery may become necessary during follow-up.

Novel emboli protection system during cardiac surgery: a multi-center, randomized, clinical trial.

BACKGROUND Stroke is a major cause of morbidity and mortality during open-heart surgery. Up to 60% of intraoperative cerebral events are emboli induced. This randomized, controlled, multicenter trial is the first human study evaluating the safety and efficacy of a novel aortic cannula producing simultaneous forward flow and backward suction for extracting solid and gaseous emboli from the ascending aorta and aortic arch upon their intraoperative release. METHODS Sixty-six patients (25 females; 68±10 years) undergoing elective aortic valve replacement surgery, with or without coronary artery bypass graft surgery, were randomized to the use of the CardioGard (CardioGard Medical, Or-Yehuda, Israel) Emboli Protection cannula ("treatment") or a standard ("control") aortic cannula. The primary endpoint was the volume of new brain lesions measured by diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DW-MRI), performed preoperatively and postoperatively. Device safety was investigated by comparisons of complications rate, namely neurologic events, stroke, renal insufficiency and death. RESULTS Of 66 patients (34 in the treatment group), 51 completed the presurgery and postsurgery MRI (27 in the treatment group). The volume of new brain lesion for the treatment group was (mean±standard error of the mean) 44.00±64.00 versus 126.56±28.74 mm3 in the control group (p=0.004). Of the treatment group, 41% demonstrated new postoperative lesions versus 66% in the control group (p=0.03). The complication rate was comparable in both groups. CONCLUSIONS The CardioGard cannula is safe and efficient in use during open-heart surgery. Efficacy was demonstrated by the removal of a substantial amount of emboli, a significant reduction in the volume of new brain lesions, and the percentage of patients experiencing new brain lesions.

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.

Minimized extracorporeal circulation does not impair cognitive brain function after coronary artery bypass grafting

OBJECTIVES Objective evaluation of the impact of minimized extracorporeal circulation (MECC) on perioperative cognitive brain function in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) by electroencephalogram P300 wave event-related potentials and number connection test (NCT) as metrics of cognitive function. METHODS Cognitive brain function was assessed in 31 patients in 2013 with a mean age of 65 years [standard deviation (SD) 10] undergoing CABG by the use of MECC with P300 auditory evoked potentials (peak latencies in milliseconds) directly prior to intervention, 7 days after and 3 months later. Number connection test, serving as method of control, was performed simultaneously in all patients. RESULTS Seven days following CABG, cognitive P300 evoked potentials were comparable with preoperative baseline values [vertex (Cz) 376 (SD 11) ms vs 378 (18) ms, P = 0.39; frontal (Fz) 377 (11) vs 379 (21) ms, P = 0.53]. Cognitive brain function at 3 months was compared with baseline values [(Cz) 376 (11) ms vs 371 (14 ms) P = 0.09; (Fz) 377 (11) ms vs 371 (15) ms, P = 0.04]. Between the first postoperative measurement and 3 months later, significant improvement was observed [(Cz) 378 (18) ms vs 371 (14) ms, P = 0.03; (Fz) 379 (21) vs 371 (15) ms, P = 0.02]. Similar clearly corresponding patterns could be obtained via the number connection test. Results could be confirmed in repeated measures analysis of variance for Cz (P = 0.05) and (Fz) results (P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS MECC does not adversely affect cognitive brain function after CABG. Additionally, these patients experience a substantial significant cognitive improvement after 3 months, evidentiary proving that the concept of MECC ensures safety and outcome in terms of brain function.

A novel blood-sparing agent in cardiac surgery? First in-patient experience with the synthetic serine protease inhibitor MDCO-2010: a phase II, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting with cardiopulmonary bypass

BACKGROUND Antifibrinolytics have been used for 2 decades to reduce bleeding in cardiac surgery. MDCO-2010 is a novel, synthetic, serine protease inhibitor. We describe the first experience with this drug in patients. METHODS In this phase II, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, 32 patients undergoing isolated primary coronary artery bypass grafting with cardiopulmonary bypass were randomly assigned to 1 of 5 increasing dosage groups of MDCO-2010. The primary aim was to evaluate pharmacokinetics (PK) with assessment of plasmatic concentrations of the drug, short-term safety, and tolerance of MDCO-2010. Secondary end points were influence on coagulation, chest tube drainage, and transfusion requirements. RESULTS PK analysis showed linear dosage-proportional correlation between MDCO-2010 infusion rate and PK parameters. Blood loss was significantly reduced in the 3 highest dosage groups compared with control (P = 0.002, 0.004 and 0.011, respectively). The incidence of allogeneic blood product transfusions was lower with MDCO-2010 4/24 (17%) vs 4/8 (50%) in the control group. MDCO-2010 exhibited dosage-dependent antifibrinolytic effects through suppression of D-dimer generation and inhibition of tissue plasminogen activator-induced lysis in ROTEM analysis as well as anticoagulant effects demonstrated by prolongation of activated clotting time and activated partial thromboplastin time. No systematic differences in markers of end organ function were observed among treatment groups. Three patients in the MDCO-2010 groups experienced serious adverse events. One patient experienced intraoperative thrombosis of venous grafts considered possibly related to the study drug. No reexploration for mediastinal bleeding was required, and there were no deaths. CONCLUSIONS This first-in-patient study demonstrated dosage-proportional PK for MDCO-2010 and reduction of chest tube drainage and transfusions in patients undergoing primary coronary artery bypass grafting. Antifibrinolytic and anticoagulant effects were demonstrated using various markers of coagulation. MDCO-2010 was well tolerated and showed an acceptable initial safety profile. Larger multi-institutional studies are warranted to further investigate the safety and efficacy of this compound.

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.