Transcatheter aortic valve replacement as a bridge to surgical aortic valve replacement in a younger patient with extremely high surgical risk

A 50‐year‐old man with decompensated aortic stenosis displayed significantly reduced ejection fraction, an ascending aortic aneurysm (55 mm in diameter), and bilateral giant bullae, and was evaluated as having extremely high surgical risk. Therefore, as a bridge to definitive treatment, he simultaneously underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and upper left lung lobectomy. His heart function recovered 6 months later and he underwent surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) and graft replacement of the ascending aorta. TAVR may serve as a bridge procedure before SAVR for aortic stenosis in younger patients with high surgical risk.     

Is this a bridge too far?

Maeda et al. present what may be the second reported case of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) followed by staged open surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in a high‐risk patient. The authors propose that TAVR may serve as a bridge procedure before SAVR for aortic stenosis in selected younger patients with high surgical risk. Further experience may clarify how long to wait after TAVR to perform SAVR. Timing will be a balance between improving surgical risk versus increasing difficulty removing the prosthesis. Knowledge of TAVR durability will ultimately be needed to decide between “destination” TAVR versus bridging to SAVR with a more durable device.     

Rapid-deployment aortic valve replacement after aortic root replacement: A safe alternative to redo root replacement

Reoperative aortic root replacement, following prior biologic or mechanical valved conduit aortic root prosthesis, presents a technical challenge. The rapid-deployment aortic valve prosthesis is an approved alternative to traditional bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement. We present three clinical cases in which rapid-deployment aortic valve prostheses were utilized in lieu of reoperative full aortic root replacement. All three patients recovered uneventfully. The rapid-deployment valve insertion in a prior surgical aortic root prosthesis is a safe option to avoid reoperative full aortic root replacement.     

Aortic dissection late after aortic valve replacement

We experienced 3 cases of an aortic dissection occurring late after an aortic valve replacement, and sucessfully treated by an aortic root replacement. An aortic dissection involving the ascending aorta can develop late after an aortic valve replacement, and such an occurrence is associated with a high mortality and morbidity. The development of effective surgical strategies at the initial aortic valve surgery, strict control of blood pressure after aortic valve replacement, serial evaluations of aortic size, and the prophylactic replacement of the ascending aorta for patients with aortic dilatation after aortic valve replacement, all play clinically important roles in preventing an aortic dissection after aortic valve replacement. When an aortic dissection occurs in patients with a previous aortic valve replacement, an aortic root replacement should be performed in order to avoid leaving the fragile diseased aortic wall including the sinus of Valsalva.     

Quadricuspid aortic valve associated with aortic stenosis and regurgitation

A 75-year-old man with moderate aortic stenosis and regurgitation admitted due to heart failure underwent uneventful aortic valve replacement with a Carpentier-Edwards pericardial bioprosthesis valve. A quadricuspid aortic valve discovered incidentally during surgery consisted of 4 of different sizes and a supernumerary cusp between the right and noncoronary cusps. No coronary abnormality was involved. Resected cusps showed fibrotic thickening with calcification and no sign of previous inflammatory disease. Although quadricuspid aortic valve is a very rare anomaly, its potential for severe valve failure in adulthood should not be neglected.     

Hospital readmission rates are similar between patients with mechanical versus bioprosthetic aortic valves

Background

The aim of this study was to evaluate hospital readmission rates and clinical outcomes between bioprosthetic (bAVR) and mechanical (mAVR) aortic valve replacements (AVR).

Methods

Adults aged 50 years or older undergoing isolated or concomitant AVR between 2011 and 2017 were included. The primary outcome was 5‐year hospital readmission. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate the risk‐adjusted impact of bAVR versus mAVR on outcomes.

Results

A total of 2981 patients were included: 406 (14%) mAVR and 2575 (86%) bAVR. Mean follow‐up was 2.9 ± 1.9 years. Operative mortality was comparable (4% bAVR vs 3% mAVR; P = 0.30). There was no risk‐adjusted difference in 30‐day (hazard ratio [HR] 1.32, P = 0.46), 1‐year (HR 1.17, P = 0.52), or 5‐year mortality (HR 0.99, P = 0.93). Aortic valve 5‐year reoperation rates were comparable (1%, P = 0.32). Risk‐adjusted hospital readmissions were similar at 30 days (14% vs 15%; P = 0.63), 1 year (30% vs 27%; P = 0.43), and 5 years (55% vs 53%; P = 0.83) in the bAVR and mAVR groups, respectively. Similar findings were demonstrated when evaluating readmissions for bleeding (5‐year readmission: 8% bAVR vs 10% mAVR; P = 0.36).

Conclusions

In this analysis of over 2900 AVRs, readmissions within 5 years were comparable between groups at approximately 50%, with patients being at highest risk in the early postdischarge period. Readmissions for bleeding constituted a minority of all readmissions for both cohorts.     

Characteristics of Inoperable Patients with Severe Aortic Valve Stenosis —In the Era of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Purpose: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has emerged as a therapeutic option for severe aortic valvular stenosis (AS). To determine the indication for TAVR, it is mandatory to clarify the characteristics of the patients who were judged as inoperable for conventional aortic valve replacement (cAVR).Methods: Of 185 patients newly diagnosed as severe AS from March 2010 to April 2011, we studied the characteristics of 61 (33%) patients (mean age, 86 ± 8 years) who were judged as inoperable.Results: Younger patients (<85 years old, n = 22) had more major comorbidities and lower left ventricular ejection fraction than older patients (≥85 years old, n = 39). Mean estimated mortality for cAVR by Japan score was 7.0% ± 7.4%. Japan score did not correlate to age and was calculated relatively low in the older age group (6.2% ± 7.0%) than the younger age group (8.3% ± 8.1%).Conclusion: One thirds of severe AS patients were judged as inoperable. In advanced age patients, age itself and other factors, which are not included in the conventional scoring systems, might have contributed to the decision making not to perform cAVR by cardiologists. Further study is necessary to define risk factors except for age.     

Experimental evaluation and early clinical results of a new low-profile bileaflet aortic valve

We performed an experimental and clinical evaluation of a new low-profile bileaflet aortic valve (Regent, St. Jude Medical Inc., St. Paul, MN, U.S.A.). Common valve sizes were experimentally tested for leakage volume, pressure drop, and transvalvular hemodynamics using a pulse duplicator. Thirty patients (mean age 60 +/- 7 years, predominant valve stenosis n = 25) received the Regent prosthesis for initial clinical evaluation. In vitro evaluation revealed equivalent leakage volumes, larger performance indices (0.552 versus 0.513), and lower pressure drops in comparison to SJM hemodynamic plus valve controls. Clinically, 21 mm (n = 9), 23 mm (n = 12), and 25 mm (n = 9) valves were implanted with no significant perioperative complications. Echocardiography revealed low transvalvular flow velocities (2.2 +/- 0.4 m/s) and low pressure gradients (20 +/- 6 mm Hg) postoperatively and at 6 months follow-up. In vitro testing and early clinical results are promising; however, long-term performance has to be proven.     

Implementation of transcatheter aortic valve replacement in California: Influence on aortic valve surgery

Objective

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) procedures were introduced in 2011. Initially, procedures were limited to patients who were not surgical candidates, but subsequently high-risk surgical candidates were considered for TAVR. The influence on aortic valve surgery in California is unknown.

Quadricuspid aortic valve—Report of a case associated with severe aortic regurgitation and review of the literature—

A case of a 59-year-old woman who had a quadricuspid aortic valve associated with severe aortic regurgitation is reported herein. The anomaly was revealed by aortography, after which the incompetent valve was excised and replaced by a St. Jude Medical prosthesis. A quadricuspid aortic valve must be considered as a malformation which leads to severe valve failure in later life.     

Balloon aortic valvuloplasty: Treatment of rapid deployment aortic valve replacement complicated by a paravalvular leak

The Edwards Intuity Elite valve system was designed to facilitate minimally invasive surgery and streamline complex aortic valve replacements and has since gained more popularity. Despite the superior results shown with rapid deployment aortic valve replacement (RDAVR) utilizing this valve system, paravalvular leaks (PVL), as a complication, remains a concern. Currently, there is no universally agreed single treatment option. A 53‐year‐old male with a history of well‐controlled diabetes mellitus and hypertension presented to the emergency room with a 1‐month history of angina, syncope on exertion and dyspnea. On further workup, he was found to have severe aortic stenosis in the setting of a bicuspid aortic valve, with non‐obstructive coronary artery disease. He proceeded to urgent RDAVR with a 23 mm Edwards Intuity Valve. Six months post‐RDAVR he re‐presented with dyspnea on exertion and near syncopal episodes. Postoperative transthoracic and transesophageal echocardiography revealed moderate to severe PVL posterior to the prosthetic aortic valve. Balloon valvuloplasty with a 25 mm True Balloon was performed. Resolution of the PVL was confirmed postprocedure both by angiography and echocardiography. The patient was followed for 1 year and remained symptom‐free with evidence of mild PVL on surveillance echocardiography. In conclusion, multiple treatment options for RDAVR complicated by PVL exist; however mid to long‐term outcome data are lacking. We presented one such case successfully treated with balloon aortic valvuloplasty.