Pathogenesis and Risk Factors for Cerebral Infarct After Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement

Abstract OBJECTIVES Frailty syndrome predicts adverse outcomes after surgical aortic valve replacement. However, disability or comorbidity is frequently associated with preoperative frailty evaluation. The effects of these domains on early and late outcomes were analysed. METHODS A prospective study including patients aged ≥75 years with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis who received aortic valve replacement with or without coronary artery bypass grafting was conducted. We used the Cardiovascular Health Study Frailty Phenotype to assess frailty, the Lawton–Brody index to define disability and the Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) to evaluate comorbidity. RESULTS Frailty was identified in 57 (31%), dependence in 18 (9.9%) and advanced comorbidity (CCI ≥ 4) in 67 (36.6%) of the 183 enrolled patients. Operative mortality (1.6%), transfusion rate and duration of stay increased in patients with CCI ≥4 (P < 0.005). There was a non-significant trend for these adverse outcomes among the frail patients. Follow-up was achieved in all patients (median/interquartile range 869/699–1099 days). Kaplan–Meier univariable analysis showed a reduced survival rate for frail and dependent patients and for those with multiple comorbidities (P < 0.05). According to multivariable analysis, frailty and comorbidity were independent risk factors for 1-year mortality, while disability and comorbidity, but not frailty, were risk factors for 3-year mortality (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS Surgical aortic valve replacement in patients aged ≥75 years is a safe procedure with low mortality rates. Operative outcomes are mainly affected by comorbidities. The main influence of survival occurs throughout the first year, and an improved functional status prevents any progression towards disabilities, which could potentially benefit long-term outcomes. Clinical trial registration number NCT02745314

Download Full-text

Abstract 14342: Redo Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement versus Valve in Valve Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Circulation ◽

10.1161/circ.142.suppl_3.14342 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 142 (Suppl_3) ◽

Author(s):

Parth M Patel ◽

Edward Chiou ◽

Jane W Wei ◽

Jose N Binongo ◽

Robert A Guyton ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Risk Factors ◽

Aortic Valve ◽

Aortic Valve Replacement ◽

Clinical Outcomes ◽

Valve Replacement ◽

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement ◽

Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement ◽

Transcatheter Aortic Valve ◽

Valve In Valve ◽

Transvalvular Gradient

Introduction: There has been a recent trend towards the increased use of biologic valves at the time of surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) with an understanding there may be a potential need for future valve intervention. In this study, we compared the clinical outcomes of Redo-SAVR with valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve replacement (VIVTAVR) in patients with a prior history of SAVR. Methods: From 2012 to 2019, 263 patients underwent isolated aortic valve reintervention after prior SAVR: VIV-TAVR (n=187) or redo-SAVR (n=86). Multivariable analysis was performed to identify risk factors mortality and aortic reintervention. Sub-analyses were performed to compare VIV-TAVR patients to Redo-SAVR patients undergoing biologic valve explant and implant (Biologic) as well as VIV-TAVR and Redo-SAVR patients matched by STS Predicted Risk of Mortality (STS PROM). Results: Operative mortality for the Redo-SAVR and VIV-TAVR was 1.2% (1) and 1.6% (3) respectively (p=0.92). Redo-SAVR patients had an increased stroke rate (7.0% vs 1.1%, p=0.02) and longer postoperative length of stay (7 vs 2 days, p<0.0001). VIV-TAVR patients had a higher rate of ≥1+ paravalvular leak (PVL) (21.4% versus 3%, p=0.0002) and a lesser reduction in transvalvular gradient (-21.9 ± 17.6mmHg vs -30.3 ± 20.7mmHg, p=0.0038). The difference in PVL was maintained during the Biologic Sub-analysis (p=0.0034). In the STS PROM Sub-analysis, early mortality was the same for each group (1.2%), and the differences in PVL (p=0.0002) and in transvalvular gradient reduction (p=0.005) were maintained. Preoperative renal failure (p=0.006) and cerebrovascular disease (p=0.04) were risk factors for mortality and prior myocardial infarction (p=0.04) was a risk factor for aortic reoperation for VIV-TAVR. No risk factors were identified for Redo-SAVR. Conclusions: Aortic valve reintervention following prior SAVR is associated with outstanding clinical outcomes. Both Redo-SAVR and VIV-TAVR can be performed with lower than expected predicted mortality. Redo-SAVR was associated with increased morbidity compared to VIV-TAVR, but improved valve function and hemodynamics. Differences in long term valve durability and patient survival between these two therapies are yet to be determined.

Download Full-text

Infective Endocarditis After Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement: A Meta-Analysis

Angiology ◽

10.1177/0003319720941761 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 71 (10) ◽

pp. 955-965

Author(s):

Jiayang Wang ◽

Xinxin Wang ◽

Fangjie Hou ◽

Wen Yuan ◽

Ran Dong ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Risk Factors ◽

Infective Endocarditis ◽

Aortic Valve ◽

Aortic Valve Replacement ◽

Hospital Mortality ◽

Valve Replacement ◽

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement ◽

Transcatheter Aortic Valve

We determined the incidence, clinical characteristics, and risk factors of post-transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR)–associated infective endocarditis (IE). We compared the incidence of IE after TAVR versus after surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). The incidence rate of IE 1-year post-TAVR was 0.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.8-1.0). Transcatheter aortic valve replacement was associated with significantly reduced IE incidence (incidence rate ratio: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.52-0.92, P = .011) compared with SAVR. In patients with TAVR IE, the pooled in-hospital mortality was 37.8% (95% CI: 32.4-43.3, I 2 = 54.9%). Pooled adjusted hazard ratio (HR) revealed that peri-procedural peripheral artery disease (HR: 4.02, 95% CI: 2.28-7.10, P < .0001), moderate or severe residual aortic regurgitation (HR: 2.34, 95% CI: 1.53-3.59, P < .0001), orotracheal intubation (HR: 2.13, 95% CI: 1.19-3.82, P = .011), and male gender (HR: 1.70, 95% CI: 1.47-1.97, P < .0001) were risk factors for post-TAVR IE. Post-TAVR IE is a life-threatening complication often resulting in in-hospital mortality. The current evidence-based meta-analysis to identify risk factors may lead to the development of effective preventive and therapeutic strategies for post-TAVR IE to ultimately improve patient outcomes.

Download Full-text