Catastrophic Cardiac Events During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

BackgroundPerioperative complications of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are decreasing but can be catastrophic when they occur. Systematic reports of the nature of these events are lacking in the contemporary era. Our study aimed to report the incidence, outcomes, and perioperative management of catastrophic cardiac events in patients undergoing TAVR and to propose a working strategy to address these complications.MethodsThis is a retrospective cohort study of patients who developed catastrophic cardiac events during or immediately after TAVR between 2015 and 2019 at a single academic centre.ResultsOf 2102 patients who underwent TAVR, 51 (2.5%) developed catastrophic cardiac events. The causes included cardiac perforation and tamponade (n = 19, 37.3%), acute left- ventricular failure (n = 10, 19.6%), coronary artery obstruction (n = 10, 19.6%), aortic-root disruption (n = 7, 13.7%), and device embolization (n = 5, 9.8%). Twenty-four patients (47.0%) with catastrophic cardiac events required stabilization by either intra-aortic balloon counter-pulsation or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. The in-hospital mortality rate increased by 11.7-fold for patients with catastrophic cardiac events compared with those without (25.5% vs 2.0%, P < 0.001). Patients who developed aortic root disruption had the highest mortality rate (42.8%) compared with the others. The incidence of catastrophic cardiac events remained stable over a 5-year period, but the associated mortality decreased from 38.5% in 2015 to 9.1% in 2019.ConclusionsCatastrophic cardiac events during TAVR are rare, but they account for a dramatic increase in perioperative mortality. Early recognition and development of a standardized perioperative team approach can help manage patients experiencing these complications.     

Impact of On-Site Cardiac Surgery on Clinical Outcomes After Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Objectives

This study sought to investigate the outcome of high-risk and inoperable patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis undergoing transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in hospitals with (iOSCS) versus without institutional on-site cardiac surgery (no-iOSCS).

Mitral Valve Replacement in Patients After Aortic Valve Replacement

Abstract Background: Mitral valve replacement in patients who previously had undergone aortic valve replacement is a technical challenge. The rigid aortic prosthesis limits visualization of the anterior mitral annulus and placement of sutures. Methods: Reoperative mitral valve replacement was performed in five patients after aortic valve replacement. Two patients underwent resternotomy to allow verification of normal aortic prosthetic valve function. Anterolateral right thoracotomy was used for reentry in the remaining three patients. Exposure of the anterior mitral annulus was accomplished by initial traction on the intact anterior leaflet, with resection of this leaflet only after placement of sutures. Results: All patients survived the surgical procedure and are well 2 to 30 months after operation. In one patient it was impossible to open one cusp of the mitral prosthesis, nor was it possible to rotate the valve. The valve was reimplanted, but sutures were tied only after testing for full free cusp motion. Conclusions: When appropriate, right thoracotomy incision offers excellent exposure of the mitral valve with minimal dissection. Placement of sutures along the anterior portion of the annulus is facilitated by traction downwards on the anterior leaflet. Full range of motion of the prosthetic cusps should be verified before tying the sutures.     

Sex-Specific Considerations in Women with Aortic Stenosis and Outcomes After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Aortic stenosis (AS) is the most common valvular disease in the elderly and is associated with poor outcomes. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is an alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in high-risk patients. Herein, we describe the gender-related differences in baseline characteristics and pathophysiologic response to severe AS, imaging considerations unique to females, and short- and long-term outcomes after TAVR. Women undergoing TAVR are older and frailer, have less cardiovascular comorbidities, smaller femoral artery size, better left ventricular systolic function, hypertrophied and small left ventricles leading to a higher incidence of paradoxical low-flow low-gradient AS, and a greater prevalence of porcelain aorta, smaller aortic annulus size, and lower coronary ostia heights. Imaging and histopathological data also suggests a sex-related myocardial response to pressure overload from AS. Women experience more vascular complications and blood transfusion requirements, serious procedural complications, and a greater incidence of stroke, but have better long-term outcomes than men. Patient-prosthesis mismatch, which is a concern in patients with a small aortic annulus size undergoing SAVR, has not been problematic with TAVR. The aforementioned findings suggest that TAVR may be preferable for women with severe AS. Further studies are warranted to directly compare TAVR with SAVR in women.     

Elective or Emergency Use of Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Objective

Evaluate the use of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices in high‐risk patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).

Background

The use of MCS devices in elderly patients with multiple comorbidities undergoing TAVR is underexplored.

Methods

All patients undergoing TAVR at a single tertiary academic center who required MCS during index procedure between 2008 and 2015 were included in a prospective database.

Results

MCS was used in 9.4% (54/577) of all TAVRs (n = 52 Edwards Sapien and n = 2 CoreValves) of which 68.5% (n = 37) were used as part of a planned strategy, and 31.5% (n = 17) were used in emergency “bail‐out” situations. IABP was the most commonly used device (87%) followed by Impella and ECMO (6% each). Among the MCS group, 22% required cardiopulmonary resuscitation during the procedure (n = 4 elective [11%] vs. n = 8 emergent [47%]) and 15% upgrade to a second device (Impella or CPB after IABP; n = 5 elective [14%] vs. n = 3 emergent [18%]). Median duration of support was 1‐day. Device related complications were low (4%). In‐hospital mortality in this extremely high‐risk population was 24% (13/54) (11% [4/37] for elective cases and 53% [9/17] for emergency cases). Cardiogenic shock (50%) was the most common cause of in‐hospital death. Cumulative all‐cause 1‐year mortality was 35% (19/54) (19% 97/370 for elective and 71% [12/17] for emergency cases).

Conclusion

Emergent use of MCS during TAVR in extremely high‐risk population is associated with high short and long‐term mortality rates. Early identification of patients at risk for hemodynamic compromise may rationalize elective utilization of MCS during TAVR.

     

Incidence and Outcomes of Acute Coronary Syndrome After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

ObjectivesThis study sought to address a knowledge gap by examining the incidence, timing, and predictors of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in Medicare beneficiaries.BackgroundEvidence about incidence and outcomes of ACS after TAVR is scarce.MethodsWe identified Medicare patients who underwent TAVR from 2012 to 2017 and were admitted with ACS during follow-up. We compared outcomes based on the type of ACS: ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), non-STEMI (NSTEMI), and unstable angina. In patients with non–ST-segment elevation ACS, we compared outcomes based on the treatment strategy (invasive vs. conservative) using inverse probability weighting analysis.ResultsOut of 142,845 patients with TAVR, 6,741 patients (4.7%) were admitted with ACS after a median time of 297 days (interquartile range: 85 to 662 days), with 48% of admissions occurring within 6 months. The most common presentation was NSTEMI. Predictors of ACS were history of coronary artery disease, prior revascularization, diabetes, valve-in-TAVR, and acute kidney injury. STEMI was associated with higher 30-day and 1-year mortality compared with NSTEMI (31.4% vs. 15.5% and 51.2% vs. 41.3%, respectively; p < 0.01). Overall, 30.3% of patients with non–ST-segment elevation ACS were treated with invasive approach. On inverse probability weighting analysis, invasive approach was associated with lower adjusted long-term mortality (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.69; 95% confidence interval: 0.66 to 0.73; p < 0.01) and higher risk of repeat revascularization (adjusted hazard ratio: 1.29; 95% confidence interval: 1.16 to 1.43; p < 0.001).ConclusionsAfter TAVR, ACS is infrequent (<5%), and the most common presentation is NSTEMI. Occurrence of STEMI after TAVR is associated with a high mortality with nearly one-third of patients dying within 30 days. Optimization of care is needed for post-TAVR ACS patients and if feasible, invasive approach should be considered in these high-risk patients.     

Outcomes After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients with Severe Aortic Stenosis and Diastolic Dysfunction

ObjectivesLeft ventricular diastolic dysfunction (LVDD) in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is associated with poor outcomes; however, the effect of its severity is controversial. We sought to assess the impact of diastolic dysfunction on hospital outcomes and survival after TAVR and identify prognostic factors.MethodsWe included patients who underwent TAVR for severe aortic stenosis with preexisting LVDD from 2009 to 2018 (n = 325). Patients with prior mitral valve surgery (n = 4), atrial fibrillation (n = 39), missing or poor baseline diastolic dysfunction assessment (n = 36) were excluded. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. 246 patients were included in the study.ResultsThe median age was 80 years (25th and 75th percentiles:75–86.7), 154 (62.6%) were males and the median EuroSCORE II was 4.3 (2.2–8). Patients with severe LVDD had significantly higher EuroSCORE, and lower ejection fraction (p < 0.001). There was no difference in post-TAVR new atrial fibrillation (p = 0.912), pacemaker insertion (p = 0.528), stroke (p = 0.76), or hospital mortality (p = 0.95). Patients with severe LVDD had longer hospital stay (p = 0.036). The grade of LVDD did not affect survival (log-rank = 0.145) nor major adverse cardiovascular events (log-rank = 0.97). Predictors of mortality were; low BMI (HR: 0.95 (0.91–0.99); p = 0.019), low sodium (0.93 (0.82–2.5); p = 0.021), previous PCI (HR: 1.6 (1.022–2.66); p = 0.04), E-peak (HR: 1.01 (1.002–1.019); p = 0.014) and implantation of more than one device (HR: 3.55 (1.22–10.31); p = 0.02).ConclusionTranscatheter aortic valve replacement is feasible in patients with diastolic dysfunction, and the degree of diastolic dysfunction did not negatively affect the outcome. Long-term outcomes in those patients were affected by the preoperative clinical state and procedure-related factors.     

Impact of Anesthesia Strategy and Valve Type on Clinical Outcomes After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

BackgroundThe randomized SOLVE-TAVI (compariSon of secOnd-generation seLf-expandable vs. balloon-expandable Valves and gEneral vs. local anesthesia in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation) trial compared newer-generation self-expanding valves (SEV) and balloon-expandable valves (BEV) as well as local anesthesia with conscious sedation (CS) and general anesthesia (GA) in patients undergoing transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Both strategies showed similar outcomes at 30 days.ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to compare clinical outcomes during 1-year follow-up in the randomized SOLVE-TAVI trial.MethodsUsing a 2 × 2 factorial design 447 intermediate- to high-risk patients with severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis were randomly assigned to transfemoral TAVR using either the SEV (Evolut R, Medtronic Inc., Minneapolis, Minnesota) or the BEV (Sapien 3, Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, California) as well as CS or GA at 7 sites.ResultsIn the valve-comparison strategy, rates of the combined endpoint of all-cause mortality, stroke, moderate or severe paravalvular leakage, and permanent pacemaker implantation were similar between the BEV and SEV group (n = 84, 38.3% vs. n = 87, 40.4%; hazard ratio: 0.94; 95% confidence interval: 0.70 to 1.26; p = 0.66) at 1 year. Regarding the anesthesia comparison, the combined endpoint of all-cause mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction, and acute kidney injury occurred with similar rates in the GA and CS groups (n = 61, 25.7% vs. n = 54, 23.8%; hazard ratio: 1.09; 95% confidence interval: 0.76 to 1.57; p = 0.63).ConclusionsIn intermediate- to high-risk patients undergoing transfemoral TAVR, newer-generation SEV and BEV as well as CS and GA showed similar clinical outcomes at 1 year using a combined clinical endpoint. (SecOnd-generation seLf-expandable Versus Balloon-expandable Valves and gEneral Versus Local Anesthesia in TAVI [SOLVE-TAVI]; NCT02737150)     

Atrioventricular Conduction After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation and Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement

AV Conduction After TAVI and SAVR . Introduction: Atrioventricular conduction abnormalities (AVCA) may complicate transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). The aim of this study was to prospectively evaluate AVCA after TAVI and SAVR. Methods and Results: Among 50 patients undergoing TAVI and 25 patients undergoing SAVR a continuous 7‐day Holter electrocardiogram (ECG) was recorded after the procedure. ECGs during TAVI and 12‐lead ECGs before and 1 and 7 days after TAVI and SAVR were analyzed. At baseline, TAVI patients were older (mean 82.1 vs 75.4, P < 0.001), had a longer PR interval (median 200 milliseconds vs 175 milliseconds, P = 0.004) and broader QRS width (median 100 milliseconds vs 80 milliseconds, P = 0.007) than SAVR patients. New AVCA were observed among 29 TAVI patients (58%), mostly new left bundle branch block (76%). Predilatation induced new AVCA in 14 TAVI patients (28%). New AVCA resolved within 24 hours in 15 TAVI patients (30%), and persisted in 14 TAVI (28%) and 3 SAVR patients (12%, P = 0.12). Among patients with persistent QRS width <120 milliseconds during the first 24 hours after TAVI, QRS width remained stable during the remainder of the observation period. During Holter monitoring complete AV block was observed in 4 TAVI patients (8%) and 3 SAVR patients (12%; P = 0.68). Conclusions: Almost half of AVCA during TAVI are induced by predilatation, but half of them resolve within 24 hours. Persistent AVCA are more frequently observed after TAVI than SAVR. If QRS width is below 120 milliseconds the first day after TAVI, the risk of late AVCA seems low. (J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol, Vol. 23 pp. 1115‐1122, October 2012)