scholarly journals Indications and predictors for pacemaker implantation after isolated aortic valve replacement with bioprostheses: the CAREAVR study

2020 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 398-404
Author(s):  
Samuli J Salmi ◽  
Tuomo Nieminen ◽  
Juha Hartikainen ◽  
Fausto Biancari ◽  
Joonas Lehto ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Atrioventricular Block ◽  
Sick Sinus Syndrome ◽  
Pacemaker Implantation ◽  
Left Ventricular Ejection ◽  
Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement

Abstract OBJECTIVES We sought to study the indications, long-term occurrence, and predictors of permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) after isolated surgical aortic valve replacement with bioprostheses. METHODS The CAREAVR study included 704 patients (385 females, 54.7%) without a preoperative PPI (mean ± standard deviation age 75 ± 7 years) undergoing isolated surgical aortic valve replacement at 4 Finnish hospitals between 2002 and 2014. Data were extracted from electronic patient records. RESULTS The follow-up was median 4.7 years (range 1 day to 12.3 years). Altogether 56 patients received PPI postoperatively, with the median 507 days from the operation (range 6 days to 10.0 years). The PPI indications were atrioventricular block (31 patients, 55%) and sick sinus syndrome (21 patients, 37.5%). For 4 patients, the PPI indication remained unknown. A competing risks regression analysis (Fine–Gray method), adjusted with age, sex, diabetes, coronary artery disease, preoperative atrial fibrillation (AF), left ventricular ejection fraction, New York Heart Association class, AF at discharge and urgency of operation, was used to assess risk factors for PPI. Only AF at discharge (subdistribution hazard ratio 4.34, 95% confidence interval 2.34–8.03) was a predictor for a PPI. CONCLUSIONS Though atrioventricular block is the major indication for PPI after surgical aortic valve replacement, >30% of PPIs are implanted due to sick sinus syndrome during both short-term follow-up and long-term follow-up. Postoperative AF versus sinus rhythm conveys >4-fold risk of PPI. Clinical trial registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02626871

scholarly journals Outcomes of transcatheter vs. isolated surgical aortic valve replacement in mediastinal radiation-associated severe aortic stenosis

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
V Nauffal ◽  
C Bay ◽  
P Shah ◽  
P Sobieszczyk ◽  
T Kaneko ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Stenosis ◽  
Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Pacemaker Implantation ◽  
Matched Cohort ◽  
Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Mediastinal Radiation ◽  
Operative Complications

Abstract Introduction Mediastinal radiation can lead to long-term cardiac sequelae, including aortic valve disease. Surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) is associated with poor outcomes in this population. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) now provides an alternative treatment strategy that may improve outcomes. Purpose To compare 30-day outcomes after TAVR vs. isolated SAVR for radiation-associated severe symptomatic aortic stenosis using the Society of Thoracic Surgery (STS) National Adult Cardiac Surgery Database. Methods We evaluated 1,668 TAVR and 2,611 isolated SAVR patients enrolled in the STS national database from July 2011 through December 2018. A propensity score for TAVR vs. SAVR was derived using a non-parsimonious logistic regression model that included 29 pre-operative variables and was used to generate a 1:1 matched cohort (NTotal=1,560). 30-day outcomes in TAVR vs. SAVR patients were compared in the matched cohort using conditional logistic regression. We also tested for temporal trends in 30-day mortality separately for TAVR and SAVR in the matched cohort, adjusted for potential confounders, to see if outcomes varied across the study period. Results In the propensity-matched cohort, baseline demographics, comorbidities and preoperative characteristics were balanced between the TAVR and SAVR groups. The mean age was 73.3 years and 75% were females in each group. In the propensity-matched cohort, TAVR was associated with significantly reduced 30-day all-cause [OR=0.50 (0.30–0.84), p=0.01] and cardiovascular mortality as compared to SAVR [OR=0.33 (0.14–0.78), p=0.01]. Similarly, post-operative complications occurred less in the TAVR group except for stroke/transient ischemic attack (TIA) [OR=3.17 (1.27–7.93), p=0.01] and pacemaker implantation [OR=1.71 (1.21–2.44), p=0.003] which were significantly higher with TAVR (Figure 1A). While, 30-day mortality associated with both procedures improved over the course of the study, the trend was only statistically significant in the TAVR group following adjustment for potential confounders. TAVR was consistently associated with better survival than SAVR in the matched cohort across the study period (Figure 1B). Conclusion Our findings suggest that TAVR is a safe alternative to SAVR for radiation-associated severe symptomatic aortic stenosis and is associated with lower 30-day mortality and post-operative complications. The risk of stroke/TIA and pacemaker implantation is higher with TAVR and should be considered when choosing therapy. Additional prospective studies to validate our findings and evaluate long-term outcomes are needed to further guide clinical decision making in this population. Figure 1 Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: Private grant(s) and/or Sponsorship. Main funding source(s): Funding to support acquisition of the data from the Society of Thoracic Surgery was obtained from discretionary funds available to Dr. Anju Nohria from the Cardiovascular Medicine Division.

scholarly journals The Aortic Annulus Stabilization Technique Prevents Paravalvular Leaks after Rapid Deployment Aortic Valve Implantation

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (24) ◽  
pp. 5776
Author(s):  
Elena Caporali ◽  
Roberto Lorusso ◽  
Tiziano Torre ◽  
Francesca Toto ◽  
Alberto Pozzoli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Aortic Valve Implantation ◽  
Stabilization Technique ◽  
Valve Implantation ◽  
Rapid Deployment

Background: Surgical aortic valve replacement with rapid deployment bioprosthesis guarantees good hemodynamic results but carries the risk of paravalvular leaks. To address this issue, an annulus stabilization technique has been recently developed. Methods: Clinical and hemodynamic parameters from patients treated for aortic valve replacement with the rapid deployment bioprosthesis and a concomitant annulus stabilization technique were prospectively collected and retrospectively analyzed. Echocardiographic data at discharge and at 1-year follow-up were collected and analysed. Results: A total of 57 patients (mean age 74.3 ± 6.1 years) with symptomatic aortic valve stenosis underwent aortic valve replacement with the rapid deployment bioprosthesis and concomitant annulus stabilization technique (mean valve size: 23.8 ± 1.9 mm). Combined procedures accounted for 56.1%. Hospital mortality was 1.8% and a new pacemaker for conduction abnormalities was implanted in 10 patients. The pre-discharge echocardiographic control showed absence of paravalvular leaks of any degree in all patients with mean valve gradient of 9.6 ± 4.0 mmHg. The 1-year echocardiographic control confirmed the good valve hemodynamic (mean gradient of 8.0 ± 2.8 mmHg) and absence of leaks. Conclusion: In this preliminary clinical experience, the annulus stabilization technique prevents postoperative paravalvular leaks after rapid deployment aortic valve implantation, up to 1-year postoperatively. Studies on larger series are of paramount importance to confirm the long-term efficacy of this new surgical technique.

Long-Term Mortality Effect of Early Pacemaker Implantation After Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement

2017 ◽  
Vol 104 (4) ◽  
pp. 1259-1264 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin L. Greason ◽  
Brian D. Lahr ◽  
John M. Stulak ◽  
Yong-Mei Cha ◽  
Robert F. Rea ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Pacemaker Implantation ◽  
Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Mortality Effect ◽  
Long Term Mortality

scholarly journals Anticoagulation and outcomes after surgical aortic valve replacement with a biological prosthesis

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
P Angleitner ◽  
M Zinggl ◽  
P Werner ◽  
I Coti ◽  
M Mach ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Term Survival ◽  
Logistic Euroscore ◽  
Biological Prosthesis ◽  
Kaplan Meier

Abstract Background No strong recommendation exists regarding the use of short-term anticoagulation after surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) with a biological prosthesis. Purpose Our aim was to analyze outcomes of patients receiving warfarin versus low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH) after isolated SAVR. Methods We retrospectively analyzed all adult patients who underwent surgery between 2009 and 2017 at our department (n=598). Exclusion criteria included pre-operative anticoagulation, atrial fibrillation, dialysis, previous aortic valve replacement, or active endocarditis. Patients who were discharged alive were stratified according to the type of anticoagulation (warfarin, n=332, 55.5%; LMWH, n=266, 44.5%). Long-term survival during the follow-up period was analyzed (median follow-up, 5.6 years). Results Patients who received warfarin had significantly lower logistic EuroSCORE and were younger (Table 1). Warfarin was more frequently utilized between 2009 and 2014, whereas LMWH was more commonly used between 2015 and 2017. Kaplan-Meier curves in Figure 1 show that patients who received warfarin had significantly superior long-term survival (log-rank test: p=0.002). Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression analysis confirmed that the use of warfarin was associated with significantly lower risk of long-term mortality when compared with LMWH (hazard ratio [HR] 0.50, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.34–0.74, p=0.001). Covariables in this model included logistic EuroSCORE, era, and duration of cardiopulmonary bypass. Conclusions The present analysis suggests that the use of warfarin is associated with significantly superior survival after SAVR with a biological prosthesis. Our findings require validation in a prospective randomized controlled trial. Figure 1. Kaplan-Meier survival curves Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None

Predictive factors of long-term survival in the octogenarian undergoing surgical aortic valve replacement: 12-year single-centre follow-up

2016 ◽  
Vol 31 (11) ◽  
pp. 1798-1805 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giangiuseppe Cappabianca ◽  
Sandro Ferrarese ◽  
Andrea Musazzi ◽  
Francesco Terrieri ◽  
Claudio Corazzari ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Predictive Factors ◽  
Single Centre ◽  
Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Term Survival ◽  
Long Term Survival

scholarly journals Benefits and Pitfalls of the Perceval Sutureless Bioprosthesis

2022 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aleksander Dokollari ◽  
Basel Ramlawi ◽  
Gianluca Torregrossa ◽  
Michel Pompeu Sá ◽  
Serge Sicouri ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Clinical Studies ◽  
Pacemaker Implantation ◽  
Hospital Length Of Stay ◽  
Paravalvular Leak ◽  
Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Term Survival

Objective: To highlight the main target points covered by clinical studies on the Perceval sutureless valve for surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) and raise a point of discussion for further expansion of its use when compared with stented bioprostheses (SB) and transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).Methods: We reviewed clinical trials and retrospective studies published up to date and compared the outcomes in terms of mortality, myocardial infarction (MI) stroke, paravalvular leak (PVL), permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI), bleeding and long-term outcomes.Results: Clinical studies showed that 30-day mortality ranged from 0–4% for Perceval and 2.9–7% for TAVR. The incidence of PVL (Perceval 1.9–19.4 vs. TAVR 9–53.5%), PPI (Perceval 2–11.2 vs. TAVR 4.9–25.5%), stroke (Perceval 0 vs. TAVR 0–2.8%), MI (Perceval 0 vs. TAVR 0–3.5%), were all higher in the TAVR group. Compared to other SB, mortality ranged from 0–6.4% for Perceval and 0–5.9% for SB. The incidence of PVR (Perceval 1–19.4 vs. SB 0–1%), PPI (Perceval 2–10.7 vs. SB 1.8–8.5%), stroke (Perceval 0–3.7 vs. SB 1.8–7.3%) and MI (Perceval 0–7.8 vs. SB 0–4.3%) were comparable among the groups. In patients with a bicuspid aortic valve, mortality rate was (0–4%) and PVL incidence was (0–2.3%). However, there was a high incidence of PPI (0–20%), and stroke (0–8%). Long-term survival ranged between 96.7–98.6%.Conclusions: The Perceval bioprosthesis has proved to be a reliable prosthesis for surgical aortic valve replacement due to its implantation speed, the reduced cardiopulmonary bypass time, the reduced aortic cross-clamp time and the shorter intensive care unit and hospital length of stay.

scholarly journals Long-Term Outcomes of Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (11) ◽  
pp. 2492
Author(s):  
Markus Malmberg ◽  
Antti Palomäki ◽  
Jussi O. T. Sipilä ◽  
Päivi Rautava ◽  
Jarmo Gunn ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Coronary Artery ◽  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Aortic Valve Stenosis ◽  
Cardiovascular Mortality ◽  
Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement

Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have increased risk of developing cardiovascular disease and events. Little is, however, known about the influence of RA to the outcomes after surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). Methods: In a retrospective, nationwide, multicenter cohort study, RA patients (n = 109) were compared to patients without RA (n = 1090) treated with isolated SAVR for aortic valve stenosis. Propensity score-matching adjustment for baseline features was used to study the outcome differences in a median follow-up of 5.6 years. Results: Patients with RA had higher all-cause mortality (HR 1.76; CI 1.21–2.57; p = 0.003), higher incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (HR 1.63; CI 1.06–2.49; p = 0.025), and they needed more often coronary artery revascularization for coronary artery disease (HR 3.96; CI 1.21–12.90; p = 0.027) in long-term follow-up after SAVR. As well, cardiovascular mortality rate was higher in patients with RA (35.7% vs. 23.4%, p = 0.023). There was no difference in 30-day mortality (2.8% vs. 1.8%, p = 0.518) or in the need for aortic valve reoperations (3.7% vs. 4.0%, p = 0.532). Conclusions: Patients with rheumatoid arthritis had impaired long-term results and increased cardiovascular mortality after SAVR for aortic valve stenosis. Special attention is needed to improve outcomes of aortic valve stenosis patients with RA after SAVR.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document