Total Endovascular Aortic Arch Repair: From Dream to Reality

The gold-standard therapy for the treatment of aortic arch pathologies is conventional open surgery. Recently, total endovascular aortic arch replacement with branched stent-grafts has been introduced into clinical practice with the aim of reducing invasiveness especially in selected high-risk patients. The aim of this review is to describe the two most commonly used branched devices for endovascular arch stent-grafting: Nexus (Endospan, Herzlia, Israle) and RelayBranch (Terumo Aortic, Glasgow, United Kingdom). Nexus is a CE-certified off-the-shelf, single branch, double stent graft system. It consists of two different components: a main module for the aortic arch and the descending aorta with a side-branch for the brachiocephalic artery (BCA), and a curved module for the ascending aorta that lands into the sino-tubular junction and connects to the main module through a side-facing self-protecting sleeve. Nexus may be used in urgent-emergency cases and also in patients with only one suitable supra-aortic target vessel but, on the other hand, it makes cerebral blood flow dependent on one source vessel only. The RelayBranch Thoracic Stent-Graft System is a custom made, double branched endograft with a wide window on its superior portion to accommodate two inner tunnels for BCA and left common carotid artery connection; bilateral cervical accesses are generally used to advance guidewires for catheterization of the inner tunnels in a retrograde fashion. RelayBranch can be customized on every patient’s specific anatomy and provides a double blood source for the brain, but it cannot be used in urgent-emergency conditions. Therefore, in order to optimize outcomes, the choice of the most appropriate device should be made considering pros and cons of each system and patient’s anatomy by an experienced aortic team. In conclusion, total endovascular aortic arch exclusion is a promising reality in selected high-risk patients

A New and Unexpected Complication after Arch Stent Grafting For Residual Dissection

This report describes an unreported complication after stent-grafting of the aortic arch for residual dissection following ascending aorta and aortic arch replacement for acute type A dissection. The patient developed, one year later, a pseudoaneurysm originating from the proximal suture line and therefore far from the stent-graft landing zone, that fistulized into the pulmonary artery. Possible causes are: suture damage during stent deployment or change of system forces after stent placement leading to high-tension on the suture line. Emergency surgery was performed. Aortic arch stent grafting is a new promising technique but its complications are still not completely known

Endovascular exclusion of the entire aortic arch with branched stent-grafts after surgery for acute type A aortic dissection

none9The treatment of residual pathology of the aortic arch after surgical repair for type A acute dissection (AAD) represents a therapeutic challenge. Recently, new branched endovascular devices have expanded the possibility of aortic arch stent-grafting (ASG) with proximal landing in zone 0. The aim of this retrospective, single-center study was to evaluate outcomes of patients with a history of surgical repair for AAD undergoing ASG with branched devices.noneD'Onofrio, Augusto; Cibin, Giorgia; Antonello, Michele; Battocchio, Piero; Piazza, Michele; Caraffa, Raphael; Dall'Antonia, Alberto; Grego, Franco; Gerosa, GinoD'Onofrio, Augusto; Cibin, Giorgia; Antonello, Michele; Battocchio, Piero; Piazza, Michele; Caraffa, Raphael; Dall'Antonia, Alberto; Grego, Franco; Gerosa, Gin

Three-Dimensional-Enabled Surgical Planning for the Correction of Right Partial Anomalous Pulmonary Venous Return

Objectives: The surgical technique for right partial anomalous pulmonary venous return (PAPVR) depends on the location of the anomalous pulmonary veins (PVs). With this in mind, we sought to evaluate the impact of 3D heart segmentation and reconstruction on preoperative surgical planning. Methods: A retrospective study was conducted on all patients who underwent PAPVR repair at our institution between January 2018 and October 2021; three-dimensional segmentations and reconstructions of all the heart anatomies were performed. A score (the PAPVR score) was established and calculated using two anatomical parameters (the distance between the most cranial anomalous PV and the superior rim of the sinus venosus defect/the sum of the latter and the distance between the PV and the azygos vein) to predict the type of correction. Results: A total of 30 patients were included in the study. The PAPVR score was found to be a good predictor of the type of surgery performed. A value p < 0.001) versus single/double patch repair. Conclusions: Three-dimensional heart segmentations and reconstructions improve the quality of surgical planning in the case of PAPVR and allow for the introduction of a score that may facilitate surgical decisions on the type of repair required

A Device Strategy-Matched Comparison Analysis among Different Intermacs Profiles: A Single Center Experience

Background: The present study evaluates outcomes of LVAD patients, taking into account the device strategy and the INTERMACS profile. Methods: We included 192 LVAD-patients implanted between January 2012 and May 2021. The primary and secondary end-points were survival and major adverse events between Profiles 1-3 vs. Profile 4, depending on implantation strategies (Bridge-to-transplant-BTT; Bridge-to-candidacy-BTC; Destination-Therapy-DT). Results: The overall survival was 67% (61-75) at 12 months and 61% (54-70) at 24 months. Profile 4 patients showed significantly higher survival (p = 0.018). Incidences of acute right-ventricular-failure (RVF) (p = 0.046), right-ventricular-assist-device (RVAD) implantation (p = 0.015), and continuous-venovenous-hemofiltration (CVVH) (p = 0.006) were higher in Profile 1-3 patients, as well as a longer intensive care unit stays (p = 0.050) and in-hospital-mortality (p = 0.012). Twelve-month and 24-month survival rates were higher in the BTT rather than in BTC (log-rank = 0.410; log-rank = 0.120) and in DT groups (log-rank = 0.046). In the BTT group, Profile 1-3 patients had a higher need for RVAD support (p = 0.042). Conclusions: LVAD implantation in elective patients was associated with better survival and lower complications incidence. LVAD implantation in BTC patients has to be considered before their conditions deteriorate. DT should be addressed to elective patients in order to guarantee acceptable results

Transapical off-pump echo-guided mitral valve repair with neochordae implantation mid-term outcomes

The NeoChord echo-guided transapical beating heart repair is a promising early-stage minimally invasive surgical procedure for degenerative mitral valve (MV) regurgitation (DMR) correction. The technique has been improved since its inception following procedure standardization, patient selection optimization, and learning curve stabilization. We hereby present the mid-term clinical results through three years of our large single center experience

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the heart transplant population: a single-centre experience

OBJECTIVES: Few anecdotal cases have been reported in the literature regarding heart transplant recipients and infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). We report our experience with 6 patients hospitalized in Northern Italy during the outbreak.METHODS: Of the 396 living heart transplant recipients from 1985 to 2020 included in the study, 6 patients developed the novel 2019 coronavirus disease. Risk factors, last follow-up characteristics, onset presentation, in-hospital course of disease and blood examinations data were collected for these patients.RESULTS: All patients were symptomatic and had positive results from a nasopharyngeal swab test for SARS-CoV-2. Of the 6 patients, 5 were hospitalized and 1 remained self-quarantined at home. Two patients died and 3 were discharged home. Two patients were admittted to the intensive care unit. Immunosuppressive therapy was modified with a median reduction comprising doses that were 50% cyclosporine and 50% mycophenolate. All patients received a medium-dose of corticosteroids as a bolus medication in addition to their therapy. All hospitalized patients received hydroxychloroquine; 2 patients received ritonavir/lopinavir. Broad-spectrum antibiotics for prophylaxis were administered to all. One patient had an ischaemic stroke and died of sepsis.CONCLUSIONS: In the absence of any strong evidence regarding the treatment of heart transplant recipients infected with SARS-CoV-2, we faced a new challenge in managing viral infection in an immunosuppressed population. Because immunomodulation interaction with the infection seems to be crucial for developing severe forms of the disease, we managed to reduce immunosuppressive therapy by adding medium doses of corticosteroids. Despite the limited number of affected patients, this report suggests that special considerations should be given to treating coronavirus disease in the heart transplant recipient population

Marginal versus Standard Donors in Heart Transplantation: Proper Selection Means Heart Transplant Benefit

Background: In this study, we assessed the mid-term outcomes of patients who received a heart donation from a marginal donor (MD), and compared them with those who received an organ from a standard donor (SD). Methods: All patients who underwent HTx between January 2012 and December 2020 were enrolled at a single institution. The primary endpoints were early and long-term survival of MD recipients. Risk factors for primary graft failure (PGF) and mortality in MD recipients were also analyzed. The secondary endpoint was the comparison of survival of MD versus SD recipients. Results: In total, 238 patients underwent HTx, 64 (26.9%) of whom received an organ from an MD. Hospital mortality in the MD recipient cohort was 23%, with an estimated 1 and 5-year survival of 70% (59.2&ndash;82.7) and 68.1% (57.1&ndash;81), respectively. A multivariate analysis in MD recipients showed that decreased renal function and increased inotropic support of recipients were associated with higher mortality (p = 0.04 and p = 0.03). Cold ischemic time (p = 0.03) and increased donor inotropic support (p = 0.04) were independent risk factors for PGF. Overall survival was higher in SD than MD (85% vs. 68% at 5 years, log-rank = 0.008). However, risk-adjusted mortality (p = 0.2) and 5-year conditional survival (log-rank = 0.6) were comparable. Conclusions: Selected MDs are a valuable resource for expanding the cardiac donor pool, showing promising results. The use of MDs after prolonged ischemic times, increased inotropic support of the MD or the recipient and decreased renal function are associated with worse outcomes

Impact of Continuous Flow Left Ventricular Assist Device on Heart Transplant Candidates: A Multi-State Survival Analysis

19si(1) Objectives: The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of the prolonged use of continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) on heart transplant (HTx) candidates. (2) Methods: Between January 2012 and December 2019, we included all consecutive patients diagnosed with end-stage heart failure considered for HTx at our institution, who were also eligible for LVAD therapy as a bridge to transplant (BTT). Patients were divided into two groups: those who received an LVAD as BTT (LVAD group) and those who were listed without durable support (No-LVAD group). (3) Results: A total of 250 patients were analyzed. Of these, 70 patients (28%) were directly implanted with an LVAD as BTT, 11 (4.4%) received delayed LVAD implantation, and 169 (67%) were never assisted with an implantable device. The mean follow-up time was 36 +/- 29 months. In the multivariate analysis of survival before HTx, LVAD implantation showed a protective effect: LVAD vs. No-LVAD HR 0.01 (p &lt; 0.01) and LVAD vs. LVAD delayed HR 0.13 (p = 0.02). Mortality and adverse events after HTx were similar between LVAD and No-LVAD (p = 0.65 and p = 0.39, respectively). The multi-state survival analysis showed a significantly higher probability of death for No-LVAD vs. LVAD patients with (p = 0.03) or without (p = 0.04) HTx. (4) Conclusions: The use of LVAD as a bridge to transplant was associated with an overall survival benefit, compared to patients listed without LVAD support.noneCarrozzini, Massimiliano; Bottio, Tomaso; Caraffa, Raphael; Bejko, Jonida; Bifulco, Olimpia; Guariento, Alvise; Lombardi, Carlo Mario; Metra, Marco; Azzolina, Danila; Gregori, Dario; Fedrigo, Marny; Castellani, Chiara; Tarzia, Vincenzo; Toscano, Giuseppe; Gambino, Antonio; Jorgji, Vjola; Ferrari, Enrico; Angelini, Annalisa; Gerosa, GinoCarrozzini, Massimiliano; Bottio, Tomaso; Caraffa, Raphael; Bejko, Jonida; Bifulco, Olimpia; Guariento, Alvise; Lombardi, Carlo Mario; Metra, Marco; Azzolina, Danila; Gregori, Dario; Fedrigo, Marny; Castellani, Chiara; Tarzia, Vincenzo; Toscano, Giuseppe; Gambino, Antonio; Jorgji, Vjola; Ferrari, Enrico; Angelini, Annalisa; Gerosa, Gin