Endovascular stent grafting versus open surgical repair of descending thoracic aortic aneurysms in low-risk patients: A multicenter comparative trial

ObjectiveResults are presented from the first completed multicenter trial directed at gaining approval from the US Food and Drug Administration of endovascular versus open surgical repair of descending thoracic aortic aneurysms.MethodsBetween September 1999 and May 2001, 140 patients with descending thoracic aneurysms were enrolled at 17 sites and evaluated for a Gore TAG Thoracic Endograft. An open surgical control cohort of 94 patients was identified by enrolling historical and concurrent subjects. Patients were assessed before treatment, at treatment, and at hospital discharge and returned for follow-up visits at 1 month, 6 months, and annually thereafter.ResultsOne hundred thirty-seven of 140 patients had successful implantation of the endograft. Perioperative mortality in the endograft versus open surgical control cohort was 2.1% (n = 3) versus 11.7% (n = 11, P < .001). Thirty-day analysis revealed a statistically significant lower incidence of the following complications in the endovascular cohort versus the surgical cohort: spinal cord ischemia (3% vs 14%), respiratory failure (4% vs 20%), and renal insufficiency (1% vs 13%). The endovascular group had a higher incidence of peripheral vascular complications (14% vs 4%). The mean lengths of intensive care unit stay (2.6 ± 14.6 vs 5.2 ± 7.2 days) and hospital stay (7.4 ± 17.7 vs 14.4 ± 12.8 days) were significantly shorter in the endovascular cohort. At 1 and 2 years’ follow-up, the incidence of endoleaks was 6% and 9%, respectively. Through 2 years of follow-up, there were 3 reinterventions in the endograft cohort and none in the open surgical control cohort. Kaplan–Meier analysis revealed no difference in overall mortality at 2 years.ConclusionsIn this multicenter study early outcomes with descending aortic endovascular stent grafting were very encouraging when compared with those of a well-matched surgical cohort. However, at 2 years’ follow-up, there is an incidence of endoleaks and reinterventions associated with endovascular versus open surgical repair. Continued vigilant surveillance of patients treated with an endograft is important

Effect of volume reduction on lung transplant timing and selection for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

AbstractBackground: End-stage chronic obstructive pulmonary disease has traditionally been treated with lung transplantation. For 2 years, our lung transplantation program has placed patients with appropriate criteria for lung transplantation and volume reduction into a prospective management algorithm. These patients are offered the lung volume reduction option as a “bridge” to “extend” the eventual time to transplantation. We examine the results of this pilot program. Methods: From October 11, 1993, to April 17, 1997, 31 patients were evaluated for lung transplantation who also had physiologic criteria for volume reduction (forced expiratory volume in 1 second ≤ 25%; residual volume > 200%; significant ventilation/perfusion heterogeneity). All patients completed 6 weeks of pulmonary rehabilitation and then had baseline pulmonary function and 6-minute walk tests. These patients were then offered volume reduction as a “bridge” and were simultaneously listed for transplantation. Postoperatively, these 31 patients were then divided into two groups: Those with satisfactory results at 4 to 6 months after volume reduction and those with unsatisfactory results. Volume reduction was performed through a video thoracic approach in 87% of the patients and bilateral median sternotomy in the remaining 13%. The condition of the patients was monitored after the operation with repeated pulmonary function tests and 6-minute walk tests at 3-month intervals. Results: Twenty-four of 31 patients (77.4%) had primary success (at 4 to 6 months) results after lung volume reduction and 7 patients (22.6%) had primary failure, including 1 patient who died in the perioperative period (3.2%). Four patients (16.7%) from the primary success cohort had significant deterioration in their pulmonary function during intermediate-term follow-up and were then reconsidered for lung transplantation. Two of them have subsequently undergone transplantation with good postoperative pulmonary function results. Interestingly, three patients had α1-antitrypsin deficiency; two had a poor outcome of lung volume reduction and primary failure. Conclusions: Lung volume reduction in these patients is safe. Seventy-seven percent of otherwise suitable candidates for lung transplantation achieved initial good results from volume reduction and were deactivated from the list (placed on status 7). Most patients entering our prospective management algorithm have either significantly delayed or completely avoided lung transplantation after volume reduction. Lung volume reduction has substantially affected the practice, timing, and selection of patients for lung transplantation. Our waiting list now has a reduced percentage of patients with a diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease compared with 3 years ago. Our experience suggests that lung volume reduction may be limited as a “bridge” in α1-antitrypsin deficiency. (J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1998;115:9-18

A Composite Metric for Benchmarking Site Performance in TAVR: Results from the STS/ACC TVT Registry

Background: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a transformative therapy for aortic stenosis. Despite rapid improvements in technology and techniques, serious complications remain relatively common and are not well described by single outcome measures. The purpose of this study was to determine if there is site-level variation in TAVR outcomes in the United States using a novel 30-day composite measure. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study using data from the STS/ACC TVT Registry to develop a novel ranked composite performance measure that incorporates mortality and serious complications. The selection and rank order of the complications for the composite was determined by their adjusted association with 1-year outcomes. Sites whose risk-adjusted outcomes were significantly more or less frequent than the national average based on a 95% probability interval were classified as performing worse or better than expected. Results: The development cohort consisted of 52,561 patients who underwent TAVR between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2017. Based on the associations with 1-year risk-adjusted mortality and health status, we identified four periprocedural complications to include in the composite risk model in addition to mortality. Ranked empirically according to severity, these included stroke, major, life-threatening or disabling bleeding, stage III acute kidney injury, and moderate or severe peri-valvular regurgitation. Based on these ranked outcomes, we found that there was significant site-level variation in quality of care in TAVR in the United States. Overall, better than expected site performance was observed in 25/301 (8%) of sites; performance as expected was observed in 242/301 sites (80%); and worse than expected performance was observed in 34/301 (11%) of sites. Thirty-day mortality, stroke, major, life-threatening or disabling bleeding, and moderate or severe peri-valvular leak were each substantially more common in sites with worse than expected performance as compared with other sites. There was good aggregate reliability of the model. Conclusions: There are substantial variations in the quality of TAVR care received in the United States, and 11% of sites were identified as providing care below the average level of performance. Further study is necessary to determine structural, process-related, and technical factors associated with high- and low-performing sites

Evaluation of flow after transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients with low-flow aortic stenosis : a secondary analysis of the PARTNER randomized clinical trial

Importance: Low-flow (LF) severe aortic stenosis (AS) is an independent predictor of mortality in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement (AVR). Little is known about improvement in flow after AVR and its effects on survival. Objective: To determine whether higher flow (left-ventricular stroke volume index [LVSVI]) after transcatheter AVR (TAVR) would indicate better clinical outcomes in this at-risk population. Design, Setting, and Participants: A substudy analysis of data from the Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves (PARTNER) randomized clinical trial and continued-access registry was conducted. A total of 984 participants with evaluable echocardiograms and baseline LF AS (LVSVI =35 mL/m2) were included. The trial was conducted at 26 sites in the United States and Canada. Patients were stratified after TAVR into tertiles by discharge LVSVI status (severe low flow [SLF], moderate low flow [MLF], and normal flow [(NF]). The present study was conducted from May 11, 2007, to January 9, 2012, with data analysis performed from April 25, 2014, to January 21, 2016. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was all-cause mortality at 1 year. Results: Baseline characteristics of 984 patients with LF AS included mean (SD) age, 84 (7) years; 582 (59.1%) men; mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score, 11.4% (4.0%); and mean LVSVI, 27.6 (5.0) mL/m2. The discharge LVSVI values by group were SLF, 23.1 (3.5) mL/m2; MLF, 31.7 (2.2) mL/m2; and NF, 43.1 (7.0). All-cause mortality at 1 year was SLF, 26.5%; MLF, 20.1%; and NF, 19.6% (P¿=¿.045). Mean LVSVI normalized by 6 months in the MLF (35.9 [9.3] mL/m2) and NF (38.8 [11.1] mL/m2) groups, but remained low in the SLF group at 6 months and 1 year (31.4 [8.4] and 33.0 [8.3] mL/m2], respectively) (P¿<¿.001 for all groups). Reported as multivariate hazard ratio, mortality at 1 year was higher in the SLF group compared with the other groups (1.61; 95% CI, 1.17-2.23; P¿=¿.004). In addition to SLF, sex (1.59; 95% CI, 1.18-2.13; P¿=¿.002), presence of atrial fibrillation (1.41; 95% CI, 1.06-1.87; P¿=¿.02), STS score (1.03; 95% CI, 1.01-1.06; P¿=¿.02), presence of moderate or severe mitral regurgitation at discharge (1.65; 95% CI, 1.21-2.26; P¿=¿.001), pre-TAVR mean transvalvular gradient (0.98; 95% CI, 0.97-0.99; P¿=¿.004), and effective orifice area index (1.87; 95% CI, 1.09-3.19; P¿=¿.02) were independent predictors of 1-year mortality.CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Severe LF at discharge is associated with an increased risk of mortality following TAVR in patients with severe AS and preexisting LF. The identification of remedial causes of persistent LF after TAVR may represent an opportunity to improve the outcome of these patients

A multicenter clinical trial of endovascular stent graft repair of acute catastrophes of the descending thoracic aorta

OBJECTIVE: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is applicable to a spectrum of thoracic aortic pathology with half of the procedures performed world-wide for indications other than degenerative aneurysm of the descending thoracic aorta (DTA). This multicenter, prospective study queried perioperative and one-year results of TEVAR using the commercially available GORE TAG device, in the treatment of acute complicated Type B dissection (cTBD), traumatic aortic tear (TT), and ruptured degenerative aneurysm (RDA) of the DTA. METHODS: This prospective, non-randomized, literature controlled study included 59 patients; cTBD, n = 19; RDA, n = 20; TT, n = 20. The primary end-point was the composite of death and total paraplegia in subjects at <or= 30 days post-treatment compared with a cohort from current literature. Secondary end-points included adverse events related to device, procedural and systemic complications, and one-year survival. RESULTS: All 59 patients had successful endoprosthesis deployment. Fifteen of 19 (79%) patients in the cTBD group had either rupture or malperfusion syndromes at presentation. Combined 30-day mortality/paraplegia rate was 13.6% (8/59), with seven (11.9%) deaths (cTBD [3], RDA [3] and TT [1]) and 1 (TT, 1.7%) case of paraplegia. The primary end-point for the TEVAR cohort was significantly lower (P = .008) when compared with a composite literature control of 800 patients (combined 30-day mortality/paraplegia of 29.6%). Thirty-day complications of any nature occurred in 48 (81%) patients; 11 (18.6%) were device related, and 43 (73%) experienced one or more systemic adverse events. Six (10%) patients required additional TEVAR implantations and 3 (5%) patients (one in each pathology group) required conversion to open surgery. Seventeen (29%) patients had endoleaks of any kind or degree through 30 days; cTBD (7), TT (2), RDA (8). Nine patients (15.3%) had perioperative strokes with two resultant deaths. During mean follow-up time of 409 +/- 309 days, an additional 12 patients died, one patient required open conversion (cTBD), and two patients had major device related events. Actuarial survival at one year was 66% (range, 52%-77%) for the entire cohort; (cTBD) 79% (range, 53%-92%), (TT) 79% (range, 53%-92%) and (RDA) 37% (range, 16%-59%). On regression analysis, age at treatment (1.05 [range, 1.01-1.09]; P = .008) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (4.3 [range, 1.3-14.4]; P = .02) were predictive of death at one year. CONCLUSION: This study confirmed treatment advantages for TEVAR for thoracic aortic catastrophes when compared with literature-based results of open repair. One-year treatment results indicate a low incidence of graft-related complications. TEVAR is the preferred initial treatment for the DTA catastrophes studied herein

Patients with type A acute aortic dissection presenting with major brain injury: Should we operate on them?

none20siopenDi Eusanio, Marco*; Patel, Himanshu J.; Nienaber, Christoph A.; Montgomery, Daniel M.; Korach, Amit; Sundt, Thoralf M.; Devincentiis, Carlo; Voehringer, Matthias; Peterson, Mark D.; Myrmel, Truls; Folesani, Gianluca; Larsen, Magnus; Desai, Nimesh D.; Bavaria, Joseph E.; Appoo, Jehangir J.; Kieser, Teresa M.; Fattori, Rossella; Eagle, Kim; Di Bartolomeo, Roberto; Trimarchi, SantiDi Eusanio, Marco; Patel, Himanshu J.; Nienaber, Christoph A.; Montgomery, Daniel M.; Korach, Amit; Sundt, Thoralf M.; Devincentiis, Carlo; Voehringer, Matthias; Peterson, Mark D.; Myrmel, Truls; Folesani, Gianluca; Larsen, Magnus; Desai, Nimesh D.; Bavaria, Joseph E.; Appoo, Jehangir J.; Kieser, Teresa M.; Fattori, Rossella; Eagle, Kim; Di Bartolomeo, Roberto; Trimarchi, Sant

GenTAC registry report: Gender differences among individuals with genetically triggered thoracic aortic aneurysm and dissection

Previous data suggest women are at increased risk of death from aortic dissection. Therefore, we analyzed data from the GenTAC registry, the NIH‐sponsored program that collects information about individuals with genetically triggered thoracic aortic aneurysms and cardiovascular conditions. We performed cross‐sectional analyses in adults with Marfan syndrome (MFS), familial thoracic aortic aneurysm or dissection (FTAAD), bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) with thoracic aortic aneurysm or dissection, and subjects under 50 years of age with thoracic aortic aneurysm or dissection (TAAD <50 years). Women comprised 32% of 1,449 subjects and were 21% of subjects with BAV, 34% with FTAAD, 22% with TAAD <50 years, and 47% with MFS. Thoracic aortic dissections occurred with equal gender frequency yet women with BAV had more extensive dissections. Aortic size was smaller in women but was similar after controlling for BSA. Age at operation for aortic valve dysfunction, aneurysm or dissection did not differ by gender. Multivariate analysis (adjusting for age, BSA, hypertension, study site, diabetes, and subgroup diagnoses) showed that women had fewer total aortic surgeries (OR = 0.65, P  < 0.01) and were less likely to receive angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi; OR = 0.68, P  < 0.05). As in BAV, other genetically triggered aortic diseases such as FTAAD and TAAD <50 are more common in males. In women, decreased prevalence of aortic operations and less treatment with ACEi may be due to their smaller absolute aortic diameters. Longitudinal studies are needed to determine if women are at higher risk for adverse events. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/97193/1/35836_ftp.pd

Stratification of Outcomes After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement According to Surgical Inoperability for Technical Versus Clinical Reasons

ObjectivesThe goal of this study was to examine the impact of reasons for surgical inoperability on outcomes in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).BackgroundPatients with severe aortic stenosis may be deemed inoperable due to technical or clinical reasons. The relative impact of each designation on early and late outcomes after TAVR is unclear.MethodsPatients were studied from the inoperable arm (cohort B) of the randomized PARTNER (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valve) trial and the nonrandomized continued access registry. Patients were classified according to whether they were classified as technically inoperable (TI) or clinically inoperable (CLI). Reasons for TI included porcelain aorta, previous mediastinal radiation, chest wall deformity, and potential for injury to previous bypass graft on sternal re-entry. Reasons for CLI were systemic factors that were deemed to make survival unlikely.ResultsOf the 369 patients, 23.0% were considered inoperable for technical reasons alone; the remaining were judged to be CLI. For TI, the most common cause was a porcelain aorta (42%); for CLI, it was multiple comorbidities (48%) and frailty (31%). Quality of life and 2-year mortality were significantly better among TI patients compared with CLI patients (mortality 23.3% vs. 43.8%; p < 0.001). Nonetheless, TAVR led to substantial survival benefits compared with standard therapy in both inoperable cohorts.ConclusionsPatients undergoing TAVR based solely on TI have better survival and quality of life improvements than those who are inoperable due to clinical comorbidities. Both TI and CLI TAVR have significant survival benefit in the context of standard therapy. (THE PARTNER TRIAL: Placement of AoRTic TraNscathetER Valve Trial; NCT00530894

TRANSFORM (Multicenter Experience With Rapid Deployment Edwards INTUITY Valve System for Aortic Valve Replacement) US clinical trial: Performance of a rapid deployment aortic valve

Background: The TRANSFORM (Multicenter Experience With Rapid Deployment Edwards INTUITY Valve System for Aortic Valve Replacement) trial (NCT01700439) evaluated the performance of the INTUITY rapid deployment aortic valve replacement (RDAVR) system in patients with severe aortic stenosis. Methods: TRANSFORM was a prospective, nonrandomized, multicenter (n 1�4 29), single-arm trial. INTUITY is comprised of a cloth-covered balloon- expandable frame attached to a Carpentier-Edwards PERIMOUNT Magna Ease aortic valve. Primary and effectiveness endpoints were evaluated at 1 year. Results: Between 2012 and 2015, 839 patients underwent RDAVR. Mean age was 73.5 8.3 years. Full sternotomy (FS) was used in 59% and minimally invasive surgical incisions in 41%. Technical success rate was 95%. For isolated RDAVR, mean crossclamp and cardiopulmonary bypass times for FS were 49.3 26.9 minutes and 69.2 34.7 minutes, respectively, and for minimally invasive surgical 63.1 25.4 minutes and 84.6 33.5 minutes, respectively. These times were favorable compared with Society of Thoracic Surgeons data- base comparators for FS: 76.3 minutes and 104.2 minutes, respectively, and for minimally invasive surgical, 82.9 minutes and 111.4 minutes, respectively (P<.001). At 30 days, all-cause mortality was 0.8%; valve explant, 0.1%; throm- boembolism, 3.5%; and major bleeding, 1.3%. In patients with isolated aortic valve replacement, the rate of permanent pacemaker implantation was 11.9%. At 1 year, mean effective orifice area was 1.7 cm2; mean gradient, 10.3 mm Hg; and moderate and severe paravalvular leak, 1.2% and 0.4%, respectively