Immediate results and long-term follow-up after repeat balloon aortic valvuloplasty

Balloon aortic valvuloplasty (BAV) was performed in 219 elderly patients with aortic stenosis between December 1985 and April 1990. Forty-three patients underwent repeat BAV for symptomatic restenosis of the aortic valve 13±8 mo following initial BAV. To evaluate the outcome following initial and repeat BAV, hemodynamic results were analyzed according to the following subgroups: BAV 1-initial BAV for all patients (n = 219); BAV 1/1-initial BAV in those who had only one BAV (n = 176); BAV 1/2-the initial BAV in those who had repeat BAV (n = 43); and BAV 2-repeat BAV (n = 43). The mean age of patients undergoing BAV 2 was 82±6 yr compared to 78±10 yr for all patients undergoing BAV 1 (p = .01). At the time of BAV 1 there was no difference in baseline or post-valvuloplasty aortic valve area (AVA) or peak aortic valve gradient (AVG) for patients having BAV 1/1 compared to those having BAV 1/2. However, for patients having repeat BAV, although the magnitude of the hemodynamic improvement of BAV 1/2 (AVA increased from 0.6 to 0.9 cm², AVG decreased from 65 to 34 mm Hg, p<.001) was similar to the magnitude of the hemodynamic improvement of BAV 2 (AVA increased from 0.5 to 0.8 cm², AVG decreased from 65 to 34 mm Hg, p<.001), the baseline AVA (0.5 cm² at BAV 2 vs. 0.6 at BAV 1/2) and the post-valvuloplasty AVA (0.8 cm² at BAV 2 vs. 0.9 at BAV 1/2) were significantly smaller (p<.004). There were no major complications in patients undergoing repeat BAV. Median event-free survival was 12 mo after initial BAV and 8 mo after repeat BAV (p = .09). In conclusion, repeat BAV results in similar immediate hemodynamic improvement and event-free survival compared to initial BAV. However, baseline aortic valve area and gradient prior to repeat BAV are significantly worse than those prior to initial BAV, suggesting that balloon-induced injury to the aortic valve may offer only a temporary hiatus from the natural history of aortic stenosis.     

Global longitudinal strain in relation to the severity of aortic stenosis: a two-dimensional speckle-tracking study

Background: Global longitudinal strain (GLS) measured by two‐dimensional speckle tracking imaging (2D‐STI) has been shown to be useful for assessing subtle change in left ventricular function in severe aortic stenosis (AS) patients with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). However, there is little information about the relation between the progression of AS and changes in GLS. The aim of this study was to evaluate the relation between the severity of valve stenosis and GLS measured by 2D‐STI in AS patients with normal LVEF. Methods: We studied 113 AS patients (age, 73.3 ± 8.8 years; male, 38%; aortic valve area (AVA), 1.0 ± 0.3 cm²; mean pressure gradient (PG), 33.8 ± 22.1 mmHg) with normal LVEF (≥50%) but without overt coronary artery disease. Patients were stratified into three groups (mild, moderate and severe AS), and the clinical characteristics and echocardiographic findings were compared among the groups. Using dedicated software, we measured GLS in the apical four‐chamber view. Results: LVEF was not significantly different among the three groups. However GLS showed significant differences in GLS among the three groups (mild: 17.1 ± 3.0%, moderate: 16.4 ± 3.0% and severe: 14.5 ± 3.9%, ANOVA P = 0.003). GLS was significantly correlated with AVA, mean PG, LVEF, LV mass index and early diastolic mitral annular velocity (e’). In multiple stepwise regression analysis, mean PG, LVEF and hypertension were independently associated with GLS (R²= 0.247, P = 0.0001). Conclusions: Despite unchanged LVEF, GLS gradually decreased as severity of AS increases. GLS measured by 2D‐STI might be useful to assess subtle changes in LV function in AS patients. (Echocardiography 2011;28:703‐708)     

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation for high risk patients With severe aortic stenosis using the Edwards Sapien balloon‐expandable bioprosthesis: A single centre study with immediate and medium‐term outcomes

Background : Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TCAVI) is an emerging alternative therapy to open‐heart surgery in high‐risk patients with symptomatic aortic stenosis. Methods : Between January 2007 and May 2009, 46 patients underwent TCAVI with the 23 mm or 26 mm Edwards Sapien bioprosthesis via either the transapical (TA‐AVI) or transfemoral (TF‐AVI) approach. All patients had an estimated operative mortality risk of >15%. Results : A total of 46 patients (30 TA‐AVI, 16 TF‐AVI) with a mean aortic valve area (AVA) of 0.63 ± 0.2 cm² and mean gradient of 54 ± 16 mm Hg were treated. Predicted operative mortality was 25.3% by logistic Euroscore and 8.7% by Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk score. Procedural success was 93% in the TA‐AVI group and 88% in the TF‐AVI group. There was one intraprocedural death in the TA‐AVI group. Overall 30‐day mortality was 6.5% (2‐TA‐AVI, 1‐TF‐AVI). Four patients (9.5%) died from noncardiac causes after 30 days. Successful TCAVI was associated with a significant increase in AVA from 0.6 ± 0.1 cm² to 1.6 ± 0.6 cm² in the TA‐AVI group and 0.6 ± 0.1 cm² to 1.4 ± 0.2 cm² in the TF‐AVI group at a mean follow up of 7.4 ± 4.4 and 8.3 ± 5.0 months, respectively. At discharge, there was significant improvement in AVA (P < 0.0001), transaortic mean gradient (P < 0.0001), and mitral regurgitation (P = 0.01). At medium term follow up, the valve area was maintained and there was significant improvement in NYHA class in both groups (P < 0.0001). Conclusion : At medium term follow‐up, both transcatheter approaches demonstrated good valve durability with no cardiac‐related mortality post hospital discharge. © 2009 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Aortic valve replacement for patients with mild to moderate aortic stenosis undergoing coronary artery bypass surgery

Aortic valve replacement (AVR) is not normally recommended in asymptomatic patients, even if aortic stenosis is severe. However, as the population ages, an increasing number of patients with mild or moderate aortic stenosis will require coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). In these cases, risk of "prophylactic" AVR needs to be weighed against risks of subsequent worsening of the mildly or moderately diseased aortic valve. If unoperated, aortic stenosis will worsen at an average of 6-8 mmHg per year (-0.1 cm2/year valve area), and one-quarter of such patients will require late AVR with a high operative mortality (14-24%). If AVR is performed at the time of CABG, operative risk is increased only slightly (from 1-3% to 2-6%), as are late mortality (1-2% per year) and morbidity (1-2% per year), mainly from hemorrhagic complications. Intrinsic gradients of most prosthetic valves are sufficiently low that even patients with low aortic valve gradients are likely to derive hemodynamic benefit from AVR. Thus, if there is a measurable (>20-25 mmHg) gradient across the aortic valve in a patient who requires CABG, the patient is at considerable risk for developing symptomatic aortic stenosis prior to reaching the end of expected benefit from CABG; in this case AVR should be considered. It may be reasonable in patients with very mild gradients (<25 mmHg) to defer aortic valve surgery; however, it should be noted that aortic stenosis progression is generally more rapid when the initial gradient is small.     

Recovery of Long‐Axis Left Ventricular Function after Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients with Severe Aortic Stenosis

Background: Patients with aortic stenosis (AS) should undergo aortic valve replacement (AVR) before irreversible LV dysfunction has developed. Assessment of long‐axis left ventricular (LV) function may assist in proper timing of AVR. Objectives: To assess serial changes in long‐axis LV function before and after AVR in patients with severe AS and preserved LV ejection fraction. Methods: The study comprised 27 consecutive patients (mean age 64.9 ± 11.7 years, 15 males) with symptomatic severe AS, scheduled for AVR. Seventeen subjects without known cardiac disease, matched for age, gender, LV ejection fraction and cardiovascular risk factors, served as a control group. Long‐axis LV function assessment was done with tissue Doppler imaging at 3 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months after AVR. Results: Mean aortic valve area in the AS group was 0.70 ± 0.24 cm². Pre‐AVR peak systolic mitral annular velocities were significantly lower compared to controls (6.7 ± 1.5 vs. 8.9 ± 2.0 cm/s, P < 0.05). Post‐AVR peak systolic mitral annular velocities improved to 9.1 ± 2.9 at 3 weeks, 8.6 ± 2.7 at 6 months, and 8.1 ± 1.7 cm/s at 12 months (P < 0.05). Improvements were seen over the whole range of pre‐AVR peak systolic mitral annular velocities. Patients with improved Sm after AVR (defined as ≥10% compared to baseline values) did not differ in baseline characteristics as compared to those who did not improve. Conclusions: In patients with severe AS and preserved LV ejection fraction, abnormal systolic mitral annular velocities improve after AVR, independent of the pre‐AVR value. (Echocardiography 2010;27:1177‐1181)     

Rate of Progression of Aortic Stenosis and its Impact on Outcomes in Patients With Radiation-Associated Cardiac Disease: A Matched Cohort Study

Objectives

The aim of this study was to study differences in progression of aortic stenosis (AS) in patients with mediastinal radiotherapy (XRT)-associated moderate AS versus a matched cohort during the same time frame, and to ascertain need for aortic valve replacement (AVR) and longer-term survival.

Outcomes of patients with low‐pressure aortic gradient undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Background: The risk/benefit balance of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in patients with low‐gradient aortic stenosis (LGAS) remains to be well defined. Aim of the study was to investigate the impact of LGAS in patients undergoing TAVI. Methods: Medline, Cochrane Library, and Scopus were searched for articles reporting outcome of patients with LGAS undergoing TAVI. The primary endpoint was 12‐months all‐cause mortality and the secondary endpoint was 30‐day all‐cause mortality. Using event‐rates as dependent variable, a meta‐regression was performed to test for interaction between baseline clinical features (age, gender, diabetes mellitus, coronary artery disease, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and type of implanted valve) and transaortic gradient for the primary endpoint. Results: Eight studies with a total of 12,589 patients were included. Almost one‐third of the patients presented with LGAS (27.3%: 24.4–29.2). Median LVEF was 48% in patients with LGAS and 56% in patients with high‐gradient AS. Patients with LGAS were more likely to have diabetes mellitus, previous coronary artery disease, higher mean Logistic EuroSCORE, and lower EF. At 12 (12–16.6) months, low transaortic gradient emerged as independently associated with all‐cause death, both if evaluated as a dichotomous and continuous value (respectively OR 1.17; 1.11–1.23 and OR 1.02; 1–1.04, all CI 95%). Clinical variables, including EF did not affect this result. Conclusions: In a population of TAVI patients, LGAS appears to be independently related to dismal prognosis. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Prognostic benefit of transcatheter aortic valve implantation compared with medical therapy in patients with inoperable aortic stenosis

Objectives : To compare survival in patients with inoperable aortic stenosis who undergo transcatheter aortic valve implantation against those managed medically. Background : Without surgical correction, survival of patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis is poor. It is unknown whether patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) have a better prognosis than similar patients who are treated with medical management. Methods : Survival rates were compared in consecutive patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis who either underwent TAVI or continued on medical management following multidisciplinary team assessment. All patients had been turned down, or considered at unacceptably high risk, for conventional aortic valve surgery. Patients were reviewed in clinic or by telephone six monthly. Mortality data was obtained from the United Kingdom Office of National Statistics. Results : The study group included 85 patients aged 81 ± 7 years (range 62–94), of whom 48 were male. Thirty eight patients underwent TAVI while 47 patients were deemed unsuitable based on echocardiographic, angiographic, or clinical criteria and remained on medical therapy. The calculated EuroSCORE for the TAVI group was 11 ± 2 and for the medical group 9 ± 2 (P < 0.001). TAVI‐related procedural mortality was 2.6%, and 30‐day mortality was 5.2%. Among the medically‐treated patients, 14 (30%) underwent palliative balloon aortic valvuloplasty, with a trend toward improved survival (P = 0.06). During overall follow‐up of 215 ± 115 days there were a total of 18 deaths; TAVI N = 5 (13%); Medical N = 13 (28%) (P = 0.04). Conclusions : Patients with severe aortic valve disease who are not suitable for surgical aortic valve replacement have an improved prognosis if treated with transcatheter aortic valve implantation rather than continuing on medical management alone. © 2010 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Outcome of reoperative aortic root or ascending aorta replacement after prior aortic valve replacement

BackgroundThere are limited data regarding the clinical outcomes of reoperative aortic root or ascending aorta replacement after prior aortic valve replacement (AVR). We aimed to analyze outcomes of reoperative aortic root or ascending aorta replacement after prior AVR.MethodsEighty patients with prior AVR underwent reoperative aortic root or ascending aorta replacement in our hospital. The indications were root or ascending aortic aneurysm in 36 patients, root or ascending aortic dissection in 37, root false aneurysm in 2, prosthesis valve endocarditis (PVE) with root abscess in 2, Behçet’s disease (BD) with root destruction in 3 patients. An elective surgery was performed in 63 patients and an emergent surgery in 17. The survival and freedom from aortic events during the follow-up were evaluated with the Kaplan-Meier survival curve and the log-rank test.ResultsThe operative techniques included ascending aorta replacement in 14 patients, ascending aorta replacement with AVR in 3, prosthesis-sparing root replacement (PSRR) in 35, Bentall procedure in 24, and Cabrol procedure in 4 patients. Operative mortality was 1.3% (1/80). A composite of adverse events occurred in 5 patients, including 1 operative death, 2 stroke and 3 renal failure necessitating hemodialysis. The mean follow-up was 35.5±22.1 months. Five late deaths occurred. The Kaplan-Meier survival at 1 year, 3 years and 6 years were 97.5%, 91.1% and 84.1%, respectively. Aortic events developed in 3 patients. The freedom from aortic events at 1-year, 3-year, and 6-year were 100%, 96.3% and 88.9%, respectively. There were no differences in survival and freedom from aortic events between the elective group and the emergent group.ConclusionsReoperative aortic root or ascending aorta replacement after prior AVR could be performed to treat the root or ascending pathologies after AVR, with satisfactory early and midterm outcomes.     

动态有效瓣口面积指数对扩大瓣环主动脉瓣置换术中期临床效果的评价

目的通过观察动态有效瓣口面积指数（effective orifice area index,EOAI）的变化,评价两种扩大瓣环主动脉瓣置换术的中期效果。方法总结30例扩大瓣环的主动脉瓣置换术患者的临床资料和术前、术后早期和中期动态EOAI变化及其他超声心动图指标,并和同期常规主动脉瓣置换患者29例的资料进行比较。结果采用Konno法12例,Manougnian 18例,扩大瓣环组早期病死率3.33%,早期心律失常发生率76.3%,低心排血量综合征发生率34.1%。随访21～109个月,随访率100%。Konno亚组和Manougnian亚组3年后左心室质量指数、左心室厚度、平均跨瓣压差比较,差异无统计学意义（P〉0.05）。普通瓣膜组与扩大瓣环组术后1年、3年生存率比较,差异无统计学意义（96.5%vs.96.5%,P=0.23;86.2%vs.89.65%,P=0.14）。Manouguian亚组与Konno亚组3年生存率比较,也差异无统计学意义（91.6%vs.88.23%,P〉0.05）。扩大瓣环组和普通瓣膜组相比,手术时间,传导束损伤发生率差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）。术后3年时,Manougnian亚组和Konno亚组EOAI值高于普通换瓣组,其中Konno亚组高于Manougnian亚组,差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）。3年随访中和Konno亚组Konno亚组和Manougnian亚组相比,延迟性瓣膜不匹配现象（dalated prosthesis-patient mismatch,DPPM）发生率差异有统计学意义（10.0%vs.26.6%,P〈0.05）。结论两种扩大瓣环方式行主动脉瓣置换术在青少年患者中均获得良好的中期效果。从动态EOAI指标观察,Konno法较改良Manougnian法更能达到扩大瓣环直径的效果,DPPM发生率明显降低。Konno法发生DPPM的比例明显低于Manougnian法,Konno法有较大优势,可以作为青少年患者主动脉瓣置换术的首选方法。     

Risk profile and outcomes of aortic valve replacement in octogenarians

AIM: To investigate the patient characteristics, relationship between the Logistic EuroSCORE (LES) and the observed outcomes in octogenarians who underwent surgical aortic valve replacement (AVR). METHODS: Two hundred and seventy three octogenarians underwent AVR between 1996 and 2008 at Bristol Royal Inf irmary. Demographics, acute outcomes,length of hospital stay and mortality were obtained. The LES was calculated to characterize the predicted operative risk. Two groups were def ined: LES ≥ 15 (n = 80) and LES < 15 (n = 193). RESULTS: In patients with LES ≥ 15, 30 d mortality was 14% (95% CI: 7%-23%) compared with 4% (95% CI: 2%-8%) in the LES < 15 group (P < 0.007). Despite the increase in number of operations from 1996 to 2008, the average LES did not change. Only 5% of patients had prior bypass surgery. The LES identifi ed a low risk quartile of patients with a very low mortality (4%, n = 8, P < 0.007) at 30 d. The overall surgical results for octogenarians were excellent. The low risk group had an excellent outcome and the high risk group had a poor outcome after surgical AVR. CONCLUSION: It may be better treated with transcatheter aortic valve implantation.     

Effect of catheter positioning on the variability of measured gradient in aortic stenosis

The purpose of this study was to quantify the variation in measured aortic valve gradient and calculated aortic valve area when different techniques of cardiac catheterization were utilized. Hemodynamic assessment of aortic stenosis severity requires an accurately determined pressure gradient. In aortic stenosis, the presence of intraventricular pressure gradients and downstream pressure recovery within the aorta means that a range of aortic valve gradients could be measured in a given patient depending upon catheter position and measurement technique. To quantify the degree of variation in measured gradient and calculated aortic valve area, we generated transvalvular gradients by nine different techniques in 15 patients (11 men, 4 women; 29-86 years old). Patients were divided into those with severe aortic stenosis (aortic valve area ≤ 0.6 cm², n = 6) and those with moderately severe aortic stenosis (aortic valve area 0.61-0.90 cm², n = 9). Considerable variation in measured gradient and calculated aortic valve area was observed. The maximum variation in gradient was similar in severe and moderately severe aortic stenosis groups (33 mm Hg. vs. 32 mm Hg., p = NS). However, the variation in gradient as a percent of maximum gradient was greater (P < 0.05) in the moderately severe aortic stenosis group. The maximum variation in calculated aortic valve area was 0.1 cm² in the severe group and 0.3 cm² in the moderately severe group (P < 0.01). An intraventricular gradient, present in 13 of 15 (87%) patients, was partially responsible for the variation in pressure gradient measurement and calculated aortic valve area. We conclude that in patients with valvular aortic stenosis, catheterization technique has an important impact on the hemodynamic assessment of aortic stenosis severity. This is particularly true in patients with moderately severe aortic stenosis where any variation tends to represent a larger percentage of the total gradient. © 1993 Wlley-Liss, 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.     

Simplified method for calculating aortic valve resistance: Correlation with valve area and standard formula

Aortic valve resistance (AVR) is a useful index to assess the severity of aortic stenosis. This study compared the standard method to calculate AVR with a simplified method based on the conventional approach for measuring vascular resistance: AVR = (peak-to-peak transaortic pressure gradient/(cardiac output*2.5))*80, where 80 is a conversion factor and 2.5 assumes that the systolic ejection period comprises 40% of the R-R cycle. We compared the standard AVR, the simplified AVR, and the Gorlin-derived value area in 118 patients with pure or dominant aortic stenosis. There was a strong linear correlation between the standard and simplified AVR (r = 0.96, p < .0001). There was a curvilinear relation between the aortic valve area and AVR (r = 0.92, p < .001). In 48 patients with aortic valve area ≥0.7 cm², the AVR was <300 dynes-sec-cm^?5 in 45 patients (94%) by the standard method and in 42 patients (88%) by the simplified method (p = NS). In conclusion, our method for measuring AVR is accurate and simpler than the standard method.© 1993 Wiiey-Liss, Inc.     

The effect of aortic valve replacement on N-terminal natriuretic propeptides in patients with aortic stenosis

BACKGROUND: Increased plasma concentrations of natriuretic peptides have been demonstrated to be associated with increased intracardiac pressure and left ventricular (LV) hypertrophy. After aortic valve replacement (AVR) in aortic stenosis patients, there is a relief of the left outflow obstruction with a substantial hemodynamic improvement. This is followed by a gradual regression of the LV hypertrophy. HYPOTHESIS: After AVR, reduction in LV filling pressure is expected to occur rapidly, while regression of LV hypertrophy will take place over a longer time period. On this basis we hypothesized that the plasma levels of N-terminal proatrial natriuretic peptide (NT-proANP) would be reduced early in the postoperative period, while N-terminal probrain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), through its closer reflection of LV hypertrophy, would be sustained for a longer period. METHODS: Two groups of patients with aortic stenosis undergoing AVR were followed for 4 and 12 months, respectively. Plasma concentrations of NT-proANP and NT-proBNP were measured before and after AVR and related to preoperative findings and changes in the aortic valve area index. RESULTS: Before AVR, the patients had significantly increased plasma levels of NT-proANP and NT-proBNP. After AVR, NT- proANP was decreased at 4 and 12 months but remained elevated compared with controls. N-terminal-proBNP tended to decrease, but did not change significantly. When the patients were followed for 12 months, only those with elevated preoperative pulmonary capillary wedge pressure had decreased peptide levels (NT-proANP: p = 0.017, NT-proBNP: p = 0.058). There was no regression of LV hypertrophy. The patients with the largest postoperative valve area index [1.27 (1.10-1.55) cm2/m2] had the largest reduction of NT-proBNP (47%). Those with the smallest valve area index [0.67 (0.54-0.73) cm2/m2] had no decrease in NT-proBNP. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that a reduction in left atrial pressure is the main factor causing the change of NT-proANP level after AVR. A small prosthetic valve orifice area with a high aortic valve gradient might prevent regression of LV hypertrophy, thus representing a stimulus for increased cardiac secretion of NT-proBNP.     

Long-term survival and functional results after aortic valve replacement in asymptomatic patients with chronic severe aortic regurgitation and left ventricular dysfunction

OBJECTIVES: We examined the influence of medical treatment on the results of surgery in terms of long-term survival and functional results in patients with chronic, severe aortic regurgitation (AR). BACKGROUND: Asymptomatic patients with AR and a reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) are at high risk because of a higher-than-expected long-term mortality. The influence of preoperative medical therapy on the outcome after aortic valve replacement (AVR) is not well known. METHODS: Surgery was indicated for the appearance of a reduced LVEF (<50%). At the time of AVR, there were 134 patients treated with nifedipine (group A), and 132 received no medication (group B). RESULTS: Operative mortality was similar in the two groups (0.75% vs. 0.76%, p = NS). The LVEF normalized in all of group A, whereas it remained abnormal in 36 group B patients (28%). At 10-year follow-up, LVEF persisted higher in group A (62 +/- 5% vs. 48 +/- 4%, p < 0.001). Five-year survival was similar in the two groups (94 +/- 2% vs. 94 +/- 3%, p = NS). Group A showed a 10-year survival not different from expected and significantly higher than that in group B (85 +/- 4% vs. 78 +/- 5%, p < 0.001), which had a worse survival than expected. CONCLUSIONS: Unloading treatment with nifedipine in AR allows one to indicate AVR at the appearance of a reduced LVEF with a low operative mortality and an optimal long-term outcome. The concept of surgical correction of AR indicated for reduced LVEF may not be applied to all patients. Indeed, in a large amount of untreated patients, a reduced LVEF preoperatively is not reversed by prompt surgery, indicating irreversible myocardial damage, and 10-year survival is worse than expected.     

Initial experience of a large,self‐expanding,and fully recapturable transcatheter aortic valve: The UK & Ireland Implanters’ registry

Objectives : The UK & Ireland Implanters’ registry is a multicenter registry which reports on real‐world experience with novel transcatheter heart valves. Background : The 34 mm Evolut R transcatheter aortic valve is a self‐expanding and fully recapturable transcatheter aortic valve, designed to treat patients with a large aortic annulus. Methods : Between January 2017 and April 2018, clinical, procedural and 30‐day outcome data were prospectively collected from all patients receiving the 34 mm Evolut R valve across 17 participating centers in the United Kingdom and Ireland. The primary efficacy outcome was the Valve Academic Research Consortium‐2(VARC‐2)‐defined endpoint of device success. The primary safety outcome was the VARC‐2‐defined composite endpoint of early safety at 30 days. Results : A total of 217 patients underwent attempted implant. Mean age was 79.5 ± 8.8 years and Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality Score 5.2% ± 3.4%. Iliofemoral access was used in 91.2% of patients. Device success was 79.7%. Mean gradient was 7.0 ± 4.6 mmHg and effective orifice area 2.0 ± 0.6 cm². Paravalvular regurgitation was more than mild in 7.2%. A new permanent pacemaker was implanted in 15.7%. Early safety was demonstrated in 91.2%. At 30 days, all‐cause mortality was 3.2%, stroke 3.7%, and major vascular complication 2.3%. Conclusions : Real‐world experience of the 34 mm Evolut R transcatheter aortic valve demonstrated acceptable procedural success, safety, valve function, and incidence of new permanent pacemaker implantation.     

Doppler echocardiographic assessment of hemodynamic progression of valvular aortic stenosis over time: comparison between aortic valve resistance and valve area.

BACKGROUND: Doppler-derived aortic valve resistance (AVR), i.e. the ratio between pressure gradient and flow rate, has been proposed as an alternative parameter to valve area (AVA) for assessing the hemodynamic severity of aortic stenosis (AS). There are no data on the evaluation of hemodynamic progression of AS using AVR. METHODS: Forty-five adult patients (24 women and 21 men, mean age 72 +/- 10 years) with AS were followed up for 18 months (range 6 to 45 months) with serial Doppler-derived AVR (Isaaz, JACC 1991; 18: 1661) and AVA (continuity equation). Rates of change of AVR and AVA over time were indexed for year of follow-up; furthermore, variations of these parameters during follow-up were expressed as percent change from baseline. RESULTS: During the follow-up period, AVA decreased from 0.74 +/- 0.28 to 0.6 +/- 0.17 cm2 (p < 0.05), with a rate of change of -0.1 +/- 0.13 cm2/year; AVR increased from 349 +/- 187 to 462 +/- 180 dyne/s/cm-5 (p < 0.05), with a rate of change of 79 +/- 69 dyne/s/cm-5/year. Variations observed in AVR, expressed as percent change from baseline, were larger than those observed in AVA (51 +/- 62% versus -16.5 +/- 15%). AVR percent change from baseline significantly correlated with AVA percent change from baseline (r = 0.83, p < 0.05). During follow-up, 6 patients showed no change in AVA: AVR was unchanged in 3 and increased in the remaining 3 patients (6, 11 and 58%, respectively), indicating a progression of AS severity that could not be appreciated from AVA alone. CONCLUSIONS: Serial changes in AVR, as assessed by Doppler echocardiography, significantly correlate with changes in AVA. Thus, the noninvasive assessment of AVR may be utilized in the evaluation of hemodynamic progression of AS and, in conjunction with AVA, may also provide complementary information for the management of these patients.     

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation for treatment of patients with degenerated aortic bioprostheses—valve‐in‐valve technique

Background: The management of patients with degeneration of surgical bioprosthetic valve replacement remains a challenge because of the higher risk of re‐do aortic valve replacement. We present a case series of five patients with degenerated aortic bioprostheses treated with transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Methods: From December 2009 to May 2010, five patients with degenerated aortic valve bioprostheses (aortic valve area < 1 cm² or severe aortic regurgitation), an excessive operative risk (EuroSCORE ≥ 30%), symptoms of heart failure (NYHA ≥ III) and an internal diameter of bioprosthetic aortic valve 20.5 ± 0.5 mm were included. Procedures were performed without hemodynamic support using femoral arteries. Balloon valvuloplasty with a 20‐mm balloon under rapid pacing was carried out before valve implantation. The 26‐mm CoreValve prosthesis, 18‐F‐generation (Medtronic, Minneapolis, Minnesota) was inserted retrograde under fluoroscopic guidance. Invasive and echocardiographic measurements were done immediately before and after TAVI. Clinical followup and echocardiography were performed after procedure (mean followup 72 days ± 60, range: 176–30 days). Results: In all patients TAVI was successful with immediate decrease of transaortic peak‐to‐peak pressure (P = 0.002). Mild aortic regurgitation occurred in two patients and one patient received a new permanent pacemaker. Major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events did not arise. NYHA functional class improved in all patients and left ventricular ejection fraction increased (P = 0.019). Conclusion: Our experiences with the valve‐in‐valve technique using the CoreValve prosthesis suggest that transfemoral TAVI is feasible in high risk patients with degenerated aortic bioprostheses. © 2010 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Staged Balloon Aortic Valvuloplasty before Standard Aortic Valve Replacement in Selected Patients with Severe Aortic Valve Stenosis

This study evaluated preoperative balloon aortic valvuloplasty (BAV) as a technique to decrease aortic valve replacement (AVR) risk in patients who have severe symptomatic aortic valve stenosis with substantial comorbidity.We report the outcomes of 18 high-risk patients who received BAV within 180 days before AVR from November 1993 through December 2011. Their median age was 78 years (range, 51–93 yr), and there were 11 men (61%). The pre-BAV median calculated Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality (STS PROM) was 18.3% (range, 9.4%–50.7%). Preoperative left ventricular ejection fraction measured a median of 0.23 (range, 0.05–0.68), and the median aortic valve area index was 0.4 cm²/m² (range, 0.2–0.7 cm²/m²). The median interval from BAV to AVR was 28 days (range, 1–155 d). There were no strokes or deaths after BAV; however, 4 patients (22%) required mechanical circulatory support, 3 (17%) required femoral artery operation, and 1 (6%) developed severe aortic valve regurgitation. After BAV, the median STS PROM fell to 9.1% (range, 2.6%–25.7%) (compared with pre-BAV, P <0.001). Echocardiography before AVR showed that the median left ventricular ejection fraction had improved to 0.35 (range, 0.15–0.66), and the aortic valve area index to 0.5 cm²/m² (range, 0.3–0.7 cm²/m²) (compared with pre-BAV, both P <0.05). All patients received AVR. Operative death occurred in 2 patients (11%), and combined operative death and morbidity in 7 patients (39%).Staged BAV substantially reduces the operative risk associated with AVR in selected patients.