Recent Development in Pulmonary Valve Replacement after Tetralogy of Fallot Repair:The Emergence of Hybrid Approaches

In the current era approximately 90% of infants born with tetralogy of Fallot (ToF) are expected to live beyond 40 years of age making it the fastest growing population amongst patients with congenital heart disease. One of the most common late consequences after repair of ToF, is pulmonary valve regurgitation (PVR). Significant PVR results in progressive dilatation and dysfunction of the right ventricle, decrease in exercise tolerance, arrhythmias, heart failure, and increased risk of sudden death. The conventional approach of dealing with this problem is to perform pulmonary valve replacement using cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) and cardioplegic arrest. However, this approach is associated not only with long operative times but also side effects related to the use of CPB. Development of percutaneous approaches to valve disease is one of the most exciting areas of research and clinical innovation in cardiovascular research. The main development has been that of transcatheter pulmonary valve replacement for the rehabilitation of conduits between the right ventricle and pulmonary artery in patients after surgery for ToF. However, with the percutaneous technique, a limited size of prosthesis can be inserted. Moreover, the technique does not offer the opportunity of treating additional defects that are frequently associated with severe PR, such as pulmonary artery dilatation, and it cannot be used in the significantly dilated native right ventricular outlet tract (RVOT). The advent of the hybrid surgical options for treating cardiac disease has integrated the techniques of interventional cardiology with the techniques of cardiac surgery to provide a form of therapy that combines the respective strengths of both fields.In this review, we present and compare recent advances in procedures to replace the pulmonary valve in patients with ToF presenting with severe PVR and dilated RVOT

Clinicians' Approach to Patent Foramen Ovale Closure after Stroke: Comparing Cardiologists and Neurologists

Background Evidence from randomized trials and updated professional society guidelines supports patent foramen ovale (PFO) closure after cryptogenic stroke in select patients. It is unclear how this has been integrated into real‐world practice, so we aimed to compare practice patterns between cardiologists and neurologists. Methods and Results In March of 2021, a survey of cardiologists and neurologists who work or previously trained at the University of Pennsylvania Health System assessed practice preferences with respect to PFO closure after stroke. Clinical vignettes isolated specific variables of interest and used a 5‐point Likert scale to assess the level of support for PFO closure. Stroke neurologists and interventional cardiologists were compared by Wilcoxon‐Mann–Whitney tests. Secondarily, Kruskal–Wallis tests compared stroke neurologists, general neurologists, interventional cardiologists, and general cardiologists. We received 106 responses from 182 survey recipients (31/31 stroke neurologists, 38/46 interventional cardiologists, 20/30 general neurologists, and 17/77 general cardiologists). A similar proportion of stroke neurologists and interventional cardiologists favored PFO closure in a young patient with cryptogenic stroke, 88% and 87%, respectively (P=0.54). Interventionalists were more likely than stroke neurologists to support closure in the context of an alternative high‐risk stroke mechanism, 14% and 0%, respectively (P=0.003). Stroke neurologists were more likely to oppose closure on the basis of older age (P=0.01). Conclusions There are key differences between how neurologists and cardiologists approach PFO closure after stroke, particularly when interpreting the stroke etiology and when considering closure beyond the scope of prior trials; this underscores the importance of collaboration between cardiologists and neurologists

SCAI expert consensus statement on operator and institutional requirements for PFO closure for secondary prevention of paradoxical embolic stroke

Until recently, evidence to support Patent Foramen Ovale (PFO) closure for secondary prevention of recurrent stroke has been controversial. Publication of high-quality evidence from randomized clinical trials and the subsequent FDA approval of two devices for percutaneous PFO closure is expected to increase the volume of PFO closure procedures not only in the United States but worldwide. As this technology is disseminated broadly to the public, ensuring the safe and efficacious performance of PFO closure is essential to mitigate risk and avoid unnecessary procedures. This document, prepared by a multi-disciplinary writing group convened by the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions and including representatives from the American Academy of Neurology, makes recommendations for institutional infrastructure and individual skills necessary to initiate and maintain an active PFO/stroke program, with emphasis on shared decision making and patient-centered care