Our experience with surgical minimally invasive aortic valve replacement

BackgroundIn the context of the development of modern cardiac valve interventional methods (TAVI, TMVI, MitraClip), miniinvasivity in cardiac surgery is becoming increasingly important. An alternative approach to complete sternotomy in isolated aortic valve replacement (AVR) is access from anterior thoracotomy or upper ministernotomy. In CKTCH Brno, is performed an isolated aortic valve replacement (AVR) from the upper hemisternotomy (UHS) from 2013 onwards.MethodsBetween 2013 and 2016, isolated AVR was perfomed in our institution 666 patients. Full median sternotomy approach was used in 565 patients, minimally invasive approach (UHS) in 101 patients. In the ministernotomy group, classical biological or mechanical prosthesis was implanted in 55 patients; in 46 patients we used rapid deployment (sutureless) bioprosthesis Sorin Perceval S. In our study we compare the results of full sternotomy a hemisternotomy approach and also describe our surgical technique of minimally invasive aortic valve replacement.ResultsWe registered gradual increase in minimally invasive AVR between 2013 and 2016 (9 patients in 2013, 59 patients in 2016). The combined hospitalization and 30-day mortality was 0.53% (3 patients) in the full sternotomy group and 0.99% (1 patient) in the ministernotomy group. In the most risky patients, we indicated ministernotomy with implantation of rapid deployment bioprosthesis (Euroscore II. 3,0 vs. 1,6 in the group of patients with full sternotomy AVR). As published, we confirmed longer aortic cross clamp time (AoX) and lenght of extracorporal circulation (ECC) in the patients with ministernotomy and implantation of sutured aortic prosthesis in comparison with full sternotomy AVR. Conversely, shorter AoX time and ECC time was observed in patients with rapid deployment prosthesis implantation from ministernotomy. We also recorded smaller postoperative blood loss in patients with ministernotomy apporach. The other monitored parameter were comparable.ConclusionIn this study we describe our technique and results of minimally invasive aortic valve replacement in our institution. Based on our results, we evaluate this technique as safe and well reproducible.     

Transapical minimally invasive aortic valve implantation and conventional aortic valve replacement in octogenarians

Objective Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has been developed to minimize the operative trauma in high-risk patients. Patient selection for TAVI is still subject to debate and octogenarians are often regarded as high-risk patients.Methods In this single-center study, data of 169 octogenarians who received conventional AVR (90) or TAVI (79) have been analyzed retrospectively according to the endpoint definitions of the Valve Academic Research Consortium to answer the following questions: (a) Should patients due to their age of 80 years or older be considered as high risk? (b) Is the EuroSCORE a suitable tool for estimating mortality after AVR or TAVI in octogenarians? (c) Is TAVI the procedure of choice for octogenarians?Results TAVI patients showed higher comorbid conditions concerning an existing renal dysfunction (31 vs. 56%, p = 0.001), peripheral vascular disease (6 vs. 30%, p < 0.001), diabetes (19% vs. 49%, p < 0.001), a decreased ejection fraction (LVEF < 30%: 2 vs. 13%, p < 0.05), and pulmonary hypertension (23 vs. 48%; p < 0.005) with an increase of the perioperative risk represented by logistic EuroSCORE (AVR 11% ± 1.27 vs. TAVI 38% ± 1.35; p < 0.0005) and STS Score (7% ± 0.52 vs. 14% ± 0.56; p < 0.0005). All-cause and cardiovascular-cause in-hospital or 30-day mortality was 5.6% (n = 5) and 3.4% (n = 3) in the AVR cohort and 8.8% (n = 7) and 7.6% (n = 6) in TAVI-patients (p = 0.55; p = 0.31), respectively. The overall combined safety endpoint at 30 days was 22.2% (n = 20) in AVR patients and 29.1% (n = 23) with regard to the TAVI group (p = 38). Analysis of cerebrovascular complications, vascular complications, and pacemaker revealed no significant differences. In the AVR group, actuarial survival at 6 months and 1 and 2 years was 89, 78, and 74%, respectively. Data of the TAVI patients are only available for a follow-up of 6 months and revealed a survival of 85%.Conclusion AVR and TAVI in octogenarians show comparable results, but the analyzed cohorts differ significantly in their risk profile. The results indicate an overrated perioperative mortality using the EuroSCORE but on the other hand logistic EuroSCORE represents articulately the different risk profile of the two groups. For this reason, we consider the EuroSCORE still to be a useful tool for preoperative risk assessment. Moreover, octogenarians cannot per se be considered as "true high risk" patients. Differentiated clinical judgment is most important for reasonable decision making.     

Severe aortic stenosis successfully treated with percutaneous aortic valve implantation]

Patients with severe calcific aortic stenosis are occasionally not amenable to surgery because of advanced age or severe co-morbidities. Percutaneous aortic valve dilation is used but has only limited time relief. While preclinical evidence on percutaneous aortic valve replacement seems promising, only very limited clinical data are available worldwide. We hereby present the first case of percutaneous aortic valve replacement successfully performed in Italy in a 74-year-old high-risk female. This case emphasizes the technical challenges inherent to this procedure and its promising role in selected very high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis, notwithstanding the early and long-term risk of adverse events.     

Minimally invasive combined aortic and mitral valve replacement

A technique is described here to carry out combined aortic and mitral valve replacement (DVR) in a patient with rheumatic valve disease utilising a minimally invasive approach without major modification in the conventional technique. An incision of approximately 5 cm is made on the upper sternum followed by partial sternal split with 'J' extension in the right third inter costal space (ICS). The mitral and aortic valves can be replaced with ease and excellent outcome. The technique is reproducible and does not require any special instrumentation. We carried out DVR with this approach in 17 patients.     

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients with severe aortic stenosis and heart failure

Severe aortic stenosis (AS) and heart failure (HF) represent an important and high-risk group of patients who are often referred for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) due to high risk for surgical intervention. Thus far, randomized controlled trials have shown comparable outcomes between TAVR and surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with severe AS and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. In the current review, we will discuss (1) the pathophysiology of HF in patients with severe AS, (2) role of imaging modalities in management, (3) role of biomarkers of HF on prognosis, (4) impact of other valvular heart diseases, (5) evidence from the contemporary trials on the role of TAVR in patients with severe AS and HF, and (6) future directions and research.     

Echocardiographic variables associated with mitral regurgitation after aortic valve replacement for aortic valve stenosis

BackgroundMitral regurgitation (MR) is frequently associated with aortic stenosis. Previous reports have shown that coexisting mitral insufficiency can regress after aortic valve replacement (AVR) while others recommend dealing with examination.AimThe study aimed to assess the severity of MR before and after aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis and to define the determinants of its postoperative evolution.MethodsFor this purpose, 30 adult patients referred for aortic valve surgery underwent pre- and 1 month postoperative transthoracic echocardiography including 2D, MM, PW, CW and color Doppler examination.ResultsPostoperative MR improved in 68.4% of the 19 patients (63.3%) who had preoperative moderate MR (p = 0.002). The effect of the valve size on the postoperative MR was statistically insignificant (0.059) but was significant on regression of the mass (p = 0.001) and drop in mean PG (p = 0.04) across AV. Patients with persistent moderate MR after surgery were all in AF and had significantly larger left atrial size (45 ± 26 mm), compared to none and a smaller left atrial (37 ± 19 mm) in patients in whom MR regressed or disappeared after surgery; respectively, p < 0.05. The postoperative variables associated with moderate MR were peak PG across AV (29.4 ± 5.1 vs 38.0 ± 5.7 p = 0.004), mean PG (15.04 ± 4.4 vs 22.8 ± 5.8 p = 0.009) and LVMI (124.7 ± 19.3 vs 147.2 ± 31.6 p = 0.065).ConclusionPreoperative predictors of residual postoperative MR were large LA and AF while the postoperative variables were high peak and mean pressure gradient across the aortic valve and high LVMI.     

Effectiveness of same day percutaneous coronary intervention followed by minimally invasive aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis and moderate coronary disease ("hybrid approach")

In 2005, the investigators described a "hybrid" cardiovascular interventional strategy combining percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for coronary artery disease (CAD) followed by valve surgery for patients with urgent complex CAD and valve disease to reduce morbidity and mortality. This hybrid approach has been extended prospectively in elderly, high-risk patients with aortic stenosis scheduled for elective minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (MI-AVR) who, on preoperative coronary angiography, were found to have moderate CAD amenable to PCI. In this prospective, observational series, 18 patients (mean age 76 years) underwent elective hybrid MI-AVR with PCI from May 2003 to February 2006. Five patients had undergone previous coronary artery bypass grafting. Patients underwent coronary angiography the day of (n = 12) or evening before (n = 6) MI-AVR, and after identifying moderately severe CAD, all 18 underwent the implantation of drug-eluting stents to the affected coronary arteries, followed by MI-AVR. Although all patients received standard doses of antiplatelet medications, including acetylsalicylic acid (325 mg before PCI and 325 mg/day thereafter) and clopidogrel (300 mg after PCI, 75 mg/day thereafter for 90 days for the Cypher stent), there were no reoperations for bleeding; only 8 of 18 patients required postoperative blood transfusions. One patient died postoperatively from a colonic perforation, and there were no late mortalities after a mean follow-up of 19 months. In conclusion, this hybrid strategy has low morbidity and mortality and may be a new therapeutic option for older, high-risk patients with combined CAD and aortic valve disease.     

主动脉瓣重度狭窄经导管主动脉瓣置换术后患者围术期效果观察

目的:探讨主动脉瓣重度狭窄患者经股动脉导管主动脉瓣置换术(TAVR)治疗前后围术期内心功能及主动脉瓣压差、跨瓣流速的变化情况。方法:本研究为回顾性研究,选取2017年9月至2019年6月,在郑州市心血管病医院接受TAVR的27例主动脉瓣狭窄患者。对经TAVR治疗前、术后1d、7 d、1个月患者的临床症状、BNP、LVEF、最大跨瓣血流速度、主动脉瓣最大跨瓣压差进行分析,观察主动脉瓣重度狭窄患者接受TAVR治疗后围术期内疗效。结果:与术前相比,患者术后临床症状、心功能NYHA分级明显改善。患者BNP、主动脉瓣最大跨瓣压差、最大跨瓣流速下降明显,在术后1 d,差异有统计学意义(均P<0. 01);术后LVEF值明显上升,术后7 d可显现,差异有统计学意义,在心功能<50%的患者中,术后1 d差异有统计学意义(P<0. 05)。结论:TAVR治疗主动脉瓣重度狭窄临床疗效确切,在围术期即可迅速缓解临床症状、改善心功能、降低BNP值、提高LVEF。合并LVEF下降的主动脉瓣重度狭窄的患者接受TAVR治疗后患者心功能改善效果更明显。     

Outcome after valve replacement for severe aortic stenosis associated with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction

BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY: Because valve replacement for aortic stenosis (AS) remains a difficult surgical challenge in the presence of left ventricular dysfunction, the immediate and long-term outcomes, and evolution of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in this setting, were analyzed. METHODS: Forty-three consecutive patients with severe AS (valve area < or =1 cm2) and reduced LVEF (< or =40%) who underwent valve replacement surgery at the authors' institution between April 1998 and December 2003 and were studied retrospectively. RESULTS: Preoperative characteristics included: LVEF 33 +/- 6%, mean transaortic pressure gradient 46 +/- 13 mmHg, and aortic valve area 0.58 +/- 0.15 cm2. Concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting was performed in 15 patients (35%). Perioperative (30-day) mortality was 2.3%, with 39.5% morbidity. During a mean follow up of 33.4 +/- 17.6 months, eight patients died. The Kaplan-Meier estimate of five-year survival was 75.3%. Postoperatively, none of the survivors remained in NYHA functional classes III-IV. The postoperative LVEF assessed in 81.8% of survivors had improved. Multivariate analysis associated improved LVEF with a higher preoperative mean transaortic pressure gradient (p = 0.0009) and a higher preoperative LVEF (p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Patients with severe AS and reduced LVEF can undergo valve replacement with low perioperative mortality and moderate postoperative morbidity. Good long-term survival with good NYHA functional status and improved LVEF can be obtained.     

70岁以上中重度主动脉瓣狭窄患者手术高危因素分析

目的:70岁以上老年中重度主动脉瓣狭窄(AS)患者行主动脉瓣置换术(AVR)早期疗效分析。方法:回顾性分析我院2013年1月至2015年8月,心脏外科108例70岁以上中重度AS患者进行AVR的临床资料。结果:108例老年患者,男性82例,女性26例,平均年龄(78.6±5.2)岁,住院30d死亡6例(5.6%)。Logistic回归分析显示,住院30d死亡危险因素与术前肾功能不全、术前心功能NYHAⅣ级、体外循环时间≥180min、同时合并冠状动脉移植手术有关。随访26.3个月,随访率97.2%,死亡2例,1例发生脑部并发症,1例死于非心源性猝死。所有患者术后心功能和生活质量较术前明显提高。结论:术前脏器功能不全是患者住院死亡的主要危险因素,提示早期手术的重要性。     

高危重度主动脉瓣狭窄经颈动脉途径行经导管主动脉瓣置换术治疗的安全性和有效性

目的分析高危主动脉瓣重度狭窄患者经颈动脉途径行经导管主动脉瓣置换术(TAVR)治疗的安全性和有效性。方法选择2017年9月～2019年2月于北京阜外医院、空军军医大学西京医院、南昌大学第二附属医院、大连医科大学第一附属医院、北京医院经颈动脉途径TAVR的症状性重度主动脉瓣疾病患者21例,男性13例,年龄58～91(72.8±8.5)岁。对入选患者临床资料、手术方法及效果进行回顾性分析。结果 21例患者中,12例接受全麻手术,9例在局麻下完成手术。20例患者经右颈动脉途径TAVR,1例经左颈动脉行TAVR治疗。置入Venus A瓣膜20例,VitaFlowⅡ瓣膜1例。其中1例患者出现颈动脉血肿,经局部处理后,血肿吸收好转,其余患者手术过程顺利。21例患者均完成术后随访,其中2例患者出现Ⅲ度房室传导阻滞,行永久起搏器置入术。患者术后随访(30±7)d,均未发生短暂性脑缺血发作、脑卒中、血管并发症、心肌梗死、瓣周漏等不良事件。术后超声心动图显示,未见中量及以上反流;且术后1个月LVEF较术前明显改善[(61.44±6.48)%vs (51.90±13.17)%,P0.05];术后1周和术后1个月平均跨瓣压差较术前明显下降[(14.90±8.03)mm Hg(1mm Hg=0.133kPa)vs (59.48±22.43)mm Hg,P0.01;(13.11±8.45)mm Hg vs (59.48±22.43)mm Hg,P0.01]。结论对不适合行股动脉入路的患者以及主动脉瓣病变复杂,尤其是严重钙化、二叶式主动脉瓣患者、既往曾行二尖瓣瓣膜置换术的症状性重度主动脉瓣狭窄患者,实施经颈动脉途径TAVR安全有效。     

Transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis

Aortic stenosis (AS) is the most common type of valvular heart disease in the elderly. Surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) has been the standard practice for treating severe, symptomatic AS, but recently new treatment options have emerged. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is now an established treatment option in patients at high surgical risk. In this review, we focus on recent developments and compare the two treatment methods in specific populations in terms of efficacy and safety (e.g., in patients with history of prior thoracic surgery, type of anesthesia employed, access site used or need for permanent pacing). The impact of comorbidities (pulmonary hypertension, arterial hypertension and obesity paradox), the cost-effectiveness of TAVR vs. SAVR and advances in transcatheter valve technology as well as issues that merit further investigation are further discussed. Moreover, outcomes and complications of TAVR in patients of different risk category (extremely high, high, intermediate and low risk) are analyzed. We strongly believe that during the following years, TAVR may evolve as the treatment of choice in a broader group of patients with symptomatic AS and beyond those with intermediate and high-risk features.     

Safety and efficacy of transcatheter aortic valve replacement through transcarotid approach for patients with severe aortic valve stenosis

正Objective To investigate the safety and efficacy of transcatheter aortic valve replacement(TAVR)through transcarotid approach for patients with severe aortic valve stenosis.Methods The clinical data of 9 symptomatic severe aortic valve stenosis patients who had high or prohibitive risk for surgery and were not suitable for TAVR through femoral artery access,and thus received TAVR     

Aortic valve replacement in patients with aortic stenosis and severe left ventricular dysfunction

BACKGROUND: The outcome of aortic valve replacement for severe aortic stenosis is worse in patients with impaired left ventricular function. Such dysfunction in aortic stenosis may be reversible if caused by afterload mismatch, but not if it is caused by superimposed myocardial infarction. METHODS: From our echocardiography database, 55 patients with severe aortic stenosis (valve area < or =0.75 cm2) and ejection fractions of 30% or lower who subsequently underwent aortic valve replacement were included. The operative mortality and clinical follow-up were detailed. RESULTS: There were 10 perioperative deaths (operative mortality, 18%). Twenty (36%) of the 55 patients had a prior myocardial infarction. In the 35 patients without prior myocardial infarction, there was only 1 death (3%). In contrast, 9 of 20 patients with prior myocardial infarction died (mortality rate, 45%; P< or =.001). The factors significantly associated with perioperative death on univariate analysis (functional class, mean aortic gradient, and prior myocardial infarction) were entered into a model for stepwise logistic regression. This multivariate analysis showed that only prior myocardial infarction was independently associated with perioperative death (odds ratio, 14.9; 95% confidence interval, 2.4-92.1; P = .004). CONCLUSIONS: The risk of aortic valve replacement in patients with severe aortic stenosis and severely reduced left ventricular systolic function is extremely high if the patients have had a prior myocardial infarction. This information should be factored into the risk-benefit analysis that is done preoperatively for these patients, and it may preclude operation for some.     

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in unicuspid aortic valve stenosis

Unicuspid aortic valve (UAV) offers unique challenges to transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), due to asymmetric expansion and apposition of the prosthesis during implantation. Although TAVR in bicuspid is now a well described experience, TAVR in unicuspid valve has not yet been described. A challenging case is described with TAVR in UAV using a Edwards Sapiens prosthesis via transapical approach. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Survival after aortic valve replacement for severe aortic stenosis with low transvalvular gradients and severe left ventricular dysfunction

OBJECTIVE: We sought to assess whether aortic valve replacement (AVR) among patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS), severe left ventricular (LV) dysfunction and a low transvalvular gradient (TVG) is associated with improved survival. BACKGROUND: The optimal management of patients with severe AS with severe LV dysfunction and a low TVG remains controversial. METHODS: Between 1990 and 1998, we evaluated 68 patients who underwent AVR at our institution (AVR group) and 89 patients who did not undergo AVR (control group), with an aortic valve area < or = 0.75 cm(2), LV ejection fraction < or = 35% and mean gradient < or = 30 mm Hg. Using propensity analysis, survival was compared between a cohort of 39 patients in the AVR group and 56 patients in the control group. RESULTS: Despite well-matched baseline characteristics among propensity-matched patients, the one- and four-year survival rates were markedly improved in patients in the AVR group (82% and 78%), as compared with patients in the control group (41% and 15%; p < 0.0001). By multivariable analysis, the main predictor of improved survival was AVR (adjusted risk ratio 0.19, 95% confidence interval 0.09 to 0.39; p < 0.0001). The only other predictors of mortality were age and the serum creatinine level. CONCLUSIONS: Among select patients with severe AS, severe LV dysfunction and a low TVG, AVR was associated with significantly improved survival.     

Propensity score analysis of a six-year experience with minimally invasive isolated aortic valve replacement

BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY: Although minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (MIAVR) is becoming an accepted technique, additional outcome evaluation is required. To correct for non-randomized treatment, the propensity score was used to analyze the present authors' experience with MIAVR compared to standard sternotomy (SS). METHODS: Between January 1995 and December 2002, a total of 921 consecutive patients underwent isolated AVR; 438 of these patients had MIAVR. Two matched cohorts each of 233 patients, and with comparable distributions of risk factors, were constructed using propensity analysis of prospectively collected data. Matching variables included left ventricular ejection fraction <30%, previous myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, previous cardiac surgery, renal insufficiency, age, gender, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), peripheral vascular disease, previous stroke or carotid disease, urgent/emergent operation, valvular pathophysiology, and atheromatous aortic disease. RESULTS: Hospital mortality and major morbidity were similar in the MIAVR and SS groups: 5.6% versus 7.3% (p = 0.45) and 13.3% versus 14.2% (p = 0.79), respectively. Multivariable analysis of all patients revealed increased mortality with severe atheromatous aortic disease (p = 0.001), COPD (p = 0.002), and urgent operation (p = 0.02). Freedom from any major perioperative morbidity was similar in both groups (86.7% versus 85.8%; p = 0.79). However, the median length of stay was shorter with MIAVR (6 versus 8 days; p <0.001). During the past three years, a greater percentage of MIAVR patients than SS patients was discharged home rather than sent to rehabilitation facilities or nursing homes (65.7% versus 52.9%; p = 0.05). CONCLUSION: MIAVR can be performed safely, with morbidity and mortality outcomes similar to those of standard sternotomy. MIAVR is associated with a decreased length of hospital stay, and a greater proportion of patients are discharged home directly.