Ad-hoc percutaneous coronary intervention and transcatheter aortic valve implantation as a combined transfemoral procedure

Coronary artery disease has been reported in more than 50% of patients with severe aortic stenosis above the age of 70 years. Combined surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is associated with a higher operative risk. Concomitant coronary artery disease also increases the procedural risk of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), and hence, a combined strategy for treating both entities needs to be carefully considered. Data regarding TAVI and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) as a combined percutaneous procedure are scarce. We report the case of an 84-year-old woman who presented with non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction and impending pulmonary edema who was diagnosed with severe aortic stenosis and two-vessel coronary artery disease. Because of an elevated logistic Euroscore of 25% and her unstable presentation, percutaneous coronary revascularization and TAVI were successfully performed in a combined percutaneous transfemoral procedure. She had a smooth recovery and rehabilitation period with significant improvement in her symptoms and functional capacity. Thirty-day follow-up, including transthoracic echocardiography and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging, showed a well-functioning prosthetic valve and no signs of residual myocardial ischemia. We therefore conclude that combined PCI and TAVI is feasible and can be associated with good clinical outcomes in selected cases. Further data and experience are needed to evaluate this strategy.     

Influence of coronary artery disease and percutaneous coronary intervention on mid‐term outcomes in patients with aortic valve stenosis treated with transcatheter aortic valve implantation

BackgroundA high frequency of coronary artery disease (CAD) is reported in patients with severe aortic valve stenosis (AS) who undergo transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). However, the optimal management of CAD in these patients remains unknown.HypothesisWe hypothesis that AS patients with TAVI complicated by CAD have poor prognosis. His study evaluates the prognoses of patients with CAD and severe AS after TAVI.MethodsWe divided 186 patients with severe AS undergoing TAVI into three groups: those with CAD involving the left main coronary (LM) or proximal left anterior descending artery (LAD) lesion (the CAD[LADp] group), those with CAD not involving the LM or a LAD proximal lesion (the CAD[non‐LADp] group), and those without CAD (Non‐CAD group). Clinical outcomes were compared among the three groups.ResultsThe CAD[LADp] group showed a higher incidence of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs) and all‐cause mortality than the other two groups (log‐rank p = .001 and p = .008, respectively). Even after adjustment for STS score and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) before TAVI, CAD[LADp] remained associated with MACCE and all‐cause mortality. However, PCI for an LM or LAD proximal lesion pre‐TAVI did not reduce the risk of these outcomes.ConclusionsCAD with an LM or LAD proximal lesion is a strong independent predictor of mid‐term MACCEs and all‐cause mortality in patients with severe AS treated with TAVI. PCI before TAVI did not influence the outcomes.     

Comparison of complications and outcomes to one year of transcatheter aortic valve implantation versus surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with severe aortic stenosis

Comparisons of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients with severe aortic stenosis remain sparse or limited by a short follow-up. We sought to evaluate early and midterm outcomes of consecutive patients (n = 618) undergoing successful TAVI (n = 218) or isolated SAVR (n = 400) at 2 centers. The primary end point was incidence of Valvular Academic Research Consortium-defined major adverse cerebrovascular and cardiac events (MACCEs) up to 1 year. Control of potential confounders was attempted with extensive statistical adjustment by covariates and/or propensity score. In-hospital MACCEs occurred in 73 patients (11.8%) and was more frequent in patients treated with SAVR compared to those treated with TAVI (7.8% vs 14.0%, p = 0.022). After addressing potential confounders using 3 methods of statistical adjustment, SAVR was consistently associated with a higher risk of MACCEs than TAVI, with estimates of relative risk ranging from 2.2 to 2.6 at 30 days, 2.3 to 2.5 at 6 months, and 2.0 to 2.2 at 12 months. This difference was driven by an adjusted increased risk of life-threatening bleeding at 6 and 12 months and stroke at 12 months with SAVR. Conversely, no differences in adjusted risk of death, stroke and myocardial infarction were noted between TAVI and SAVR at each time point. In conclusion, in a large observational registry with admitted potential for selection bias and residual confounding, TAVI was not associated with a higher risk of 1-year MACCEs compared to SAVR.     

Successful percutaneous coronary intervention after implantation of a CoreValve percutaneous aortic valve

Background: The association between aortic valve disease and coronary atherosclerosis is common. In the recent era of percutaneous aortic valve replacement (PAVR), there is little experience with coronary artery intervention after valve implantation. Case report: To our knowledge, this is the first case of successful percutaneous coronary intervention after implantation of a CoreValve percutaneous aortic valve. We report a case of a 79‐year‐old female patient who underwent successful coronary artery intervention few months after a CoreValve's percutaneous implantation for severe aortic valve stenosis. Verifying the position of the used wires (crossing from inside the self expanding frame) is of utmost importance before proceeding to coronary intervention. In this case, crossing the aortic valve, coronary angiography, and multivessel stenting were successfully performed. Conclusion: Percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with previous CoreValve is feasible and safe. © 2008 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Impact of coronary artery disease on outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Background: Coronary artery disease (CAD) negatively impacts prognosis of patients undergoing surgical aortic valve replacement and revascularization is generally recommended at the time of surgery. Implications of CAD and preprocedural revascularization in the setting of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) are not known. Method: Patients who underwent successful TAVI from January 2005 to December 2007 were retrospectively divided into five groups according to the extent of CAD assessed with the Duke Myocardial Jeopardy Score: no CAD, CAD with DMJS 0, 2, 4, and ≥6. Study endpoints included 30‐day and 1‐year survival, evolution of symptoms, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), and mitral regurgitation (MR) and need of revascularization during follow‐up. Results: One hundred and thirty‐six patients were included, among which 104 (76.5%) had coexisting CAD. Thirty‐day mortality in the five study groups was respectively 6.3, 14.6, 7.1, 5.6, and 17.7% with no statistically significant difference between groups (P = 0.56). Overall survival rate at one year was 77.9% (95% CL: 70.9, 84.9) with no difference between groups (P = 0.63). Symptoms, LVEF, and MR all significantly improved in the first month after TAVI, but the extent of improvement did not differ between groups (P > 0.08). Revascularization after TAVI was uncommon. Conclusion: The presence of CAD or nonrevascularized myocardium was not associated with an increased risk of adverse events in this initial cohort. On the basis of these early results, complete revascularization may not constitute a prerequisite of TAVI. This conclusion will require re‐assessment as experience accrues in patients with extensive CAD. © 2010 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Comparison of outcomes in new-generation versus early-generation heart valve in transcatheter aortic valve implantation: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BackgroundNew-generation (NG) valves for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has recently been widely used in real-world practice, yet its comparative outcomes with early-generation (EG) valves remain under-explored.MethodsAn electronic literature search using PUBMED and EMBASE was conducted from inception to April 2017 for matched-cohort studies. Articles that compared the outcomes of NG vs. EG valves post TAVI with at least one of the following clinical outcome reported were included: all-cause mortality, major or life-threatening bleeding, major vascular complications (MVC), significant (more than moderate) paravalvular regurgitation (PVR), cerebrovascular events, significant (stage 2 or 3) acute kidney injury (AKI) and new permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) that occurred either in-hospital or within 30-days.ResultsA total of 6 observational matched-cohort studies with 585 and 647 patients included in NG and EG valves, respectively, were included. EG valves were associated with a lower incidence of major or life-threatening bleeding (5.7% vs. 15.7%, p < 0.00001), significant paravalvular regurgitation (5.3% vs. 14.4%, p = 0.001), and significant AKI (4.4% vs. 7.5, p = 0.03). All-cause mortality (3.5% vs. 5.0, p = 0.43), cerebrovascular events (3.4% vs. 2.3%, p = 0.34) and new PPI (11.0% vs. 14.6%, p = 0.52) were similar between the two groups. NG demonstrated lower tendency of MVC (2.5% vs. 7.2, p = 0.09) compared to EG valves.ConclusionsNG demonstrated lower rates of significant AKI, significant PVR and major or life-threatening bleeding while all-cause mortality, new PPI, and cerebrovascular events remained similar compared to EG valves.     

Feasibility and outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve implantation in high-risk patients with stenotic bicuspid aortic valves

Little is known about transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in patients with bicuspid aortic valve stenosis, which usually represents a contraindication. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility and the results of TAVI in this patient subset. Of 316 high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis who underwent TAVI from January 2009 to January 2012, 15 (5%) had documented bicuspid aortic valves. They were treated using a transarterial approach, using the Medtronic CoreValve system. Patients were aged 80 ± 10 years, in New York Heart Association functional classes III and IV. The mean aortic valve area was 0.8 ± 0.3 cm(2), and the mean gradient was 60 ± 19 mm Hg. The mean calcium score, calculated using multislice computed tomography, was 4,553 ± 1,872 arbitrary units. The procedure was successful in all but 1 patient. Major adverse events, according to Valvular Academic Research Consortium definitions, were encountered in 1 patient (death). The mean postimplantation prosthetic gradient was 11 ± 4 mm Hg, and ≤1+ periprosthetic leaks were observed in all but 2 patients. The mean prosthetic ellipticity index was 0.7 ± 0.2 at the level of the native annulus and 0.8 ± 0.2 at the level of the prosthetic leaflets. After a mean follow-up period of 8 ± 7 months, 1 patient had died from aortic dissection; there were no additional adverse events. All but 2 hospital survivors were in New York Heart Association class I or II. In conclusion, the present series suggests that transarterial Medtronic CoreValve implantation is feasible in selected patients with bicuspid aortic valve and may lead to short-term hemodynamic and clinical improvement.     

Role of coronary angiogram before transcatheter aortic valve implantation

BACKGROUNDCoexistent coronary artery disease is commonly seen in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Previous studies showed that pre-TAVI coronary revascularisation was not associated with improved outcomes, challenging the clinical value of routine coronary angiogram (CA).AIMTo assess whether a selective approach to perform pre-TAVI CA is safe and feasible.METHODSThis was a retrospective non-randomised single-centre analysis of consecutive patients undergoing TAVI. A selective approach for performing CA tailored to patient clinical need was developed. Clinical outcomes were compared based on whether patients underwent CA. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infraction, repeat CA, and re-admission with heart failure.RESULTSOf 348 patients (average age 81 ± 7 and 57% male) were included with a median follow up of 19 (9-31) mo. One hundred and fifty-four (44%) patients, underwent CA before TAVI procedure. Patients who underwent CA were more likely to have previous myocardial infarction (MI) and previous percutaneous revascularisation. The primary endpoint was comparable between the two group (22.6% vs 22.2%; hazard ratio 1.05, 95%CI: 0.67-1.64, P = 0.82). Patients who had CA were less likely to be readmitted with heart failure (P = 0.022), but more likely to have repeat CA (P = 0.002) and MI (P = 0.007). In those who underwent CA, the presence of flow limiting lesions did not affect the incidence of primary endpoint, or its components, except for increased rate of repeat CA.CONCLUSIONSelective CA is a feasible and safe approach. The clinical value of routine CA should be challenged in future randomised trials     

Comparison of morbidity and mortality in diabetics versus nondiabetics having isolated coronary bypass versus coronary bypass plus valve operations versus isolated valve operations

The impact of diabetes mellitus (DM) on the outcome of patients requiring cardiac surgery has been investigated in previous decades. However, the profile of cardiac surgical practice is changing in addition to changes in patients' risk profile, making the results inconclusive. In this study we sought to investigate the impact of DM on operative mortality and morbidity in patients undergoing cardiac surgery and adjust for patient and disease characteristics. In total 10,709 patients (9,229 nondiabetics and 1,480 diabetics) were admitted to the study; 5,557 patients (1,012 diabetics) underwent an isolated coronary operation, 1,775 patients (278 diabetics) underwent coronary plus valve operations, and 3,337 patients (209 diabetics) underwent valve operations. To control for differences in patient and disease characteristics, a propensity score (for DM) was performed. DM increased crude morbidity and this difference was maintained after risk adjustment for propensity score; conversely, the crude operative mortality risk was higher in diabetics but not significantly after adjustment for propensity score. Thereafter, DM remained independently associated to operative mortality risk in the valve population only (odds ratio 2.53, 95% confidence interval 1.45 to 4.4, p = 0.001). In conclusion, DM has a significant impact on operative mortality of patients undergoing heart valve surgery. Although diabetic patients undergoing coronary operations are not at increased risk of operative mortality, morbidity is significantly affected in the overall population.     

Dual antiplatelet therapy versus aspirin alone in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with clopidogrel and aspirin is a widely accepted strategy in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), but this approach is not evidence based. The goal of the present study was to determine whether DAPT in patients undergoing TAVI is associated with improved outcomes compared to aspirin alone. From May 2009 to August 2010, consecutive patients were randomized to receive a 300-mg loading dose of clopidogrel on the day before TAVI followed by a 3-month maintenance daily dose of 75 mg plus aspirin 100 mg lifelong (DAPT group) or aspirin 100 mg alone (ASA group). The primary end point was the composite of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events, defined as death from any cause, myocardial infarction, major stroke, urgent or emergency conversion to surgery, or life-threatening bleeding. The cumulative incidence of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events at 30 days and 6 months was 14% and 16%, respectively. No significant differences between the DAPT and ASA groups were noted at both 30 days (13% vs 15%, p = 0.71) and 6 months (18% vs 15%; p = 0.85). In conclusion, the strategy of adding clopidogrel to aspirin for 3 months after TAVI was not found to be superior to aspirin alone. These results must be confirmed in a larger randomized trial.     

Novel percutaneous intervention technique for obstructed coronary artery after valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve replacement

Valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve replacement (valve-in-valve TAVR) increases the risk of coronary obstruction. Although the coronary protection strategy is widely used, the use of the bailout technique after coronary obstruction is limited. Hence, we report a simple bailout technique for coronary obstruction after valve-in-valve TAVR. An 82-year-old woman presented with structural valve deterioration. The left anterior descending coronary artery had 90% stenosis. After TAVR, the prosthetic valve shifted close to the ascending aorta wall, consequently impairing coronary flow. The wire crossed with the Judkins right guiding catheter (JR) reference to the en-face and perpendicular views. Using the guide-extension catheter, the JR contacted the contralateral ascending aorta as a backup catheter. After a balloon was dilated between the prosthetic valve and aorta, JR engaged into the coronary artery with excellent backup. This novel “Whisker pole guiding technique” is useful, even after valve-in-valve TAVR.