Safety, effectiveness and haemodynamic performance of a new stented aortic valve bioprosthesis

OBJECTIVES: We assessed the safety, effectiveness and haemodynamic performance of a new bovine stented aortic valve bioprosthesis (Avalus™). METHODS: The PERIGON Pivotal Trial is a prospective, non-randomized, multicentre study. Subjects had symptomatic moderate or severe aortic stenosis or chronic, severe aortic regurgitation. Death, valve-related adverse events (AEs), functional recovery and haemodynamic performance were assessed at discharge, 3-6 months and 1 year. The primary analysis compared 'late' (>30 days post-implant) linearized rates of valve-related thromboembolism, thrombosis, all and major haemorrhage, all and major paravalvular leak (PVL) and endocarditis after implantation with objective performance criteria (OPC) for AEs, in accordance with EN ISO 5840:2009. We hypothesized that the upper 95% confidence bounds of the true linearized AE rates would be ≥ 2 × OPC; rejection of the null hypothesis would demonstrate that these rates were below acceptable rates. The analysis was required to include at least 150 patients followed to 1 year and 400 valve-years. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was also performed. RESULTS: Total number of valve-years was 459.5 (n = 686). Linearized rates were <2 × OPC for death and valve-related thromboembolism, valve thrombosis, all and major PVL, and endocarditis, but ≥2 × OPC for all and major haemorrhage. Survival at 1 year (n = 270) was 96.4%. Patients showed good functional recovery, and haemodynamic performance was within expected range. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis demonstrated a good safety profile and clinical effectiveness of the Avalus valve except for bleeding rates. The linearized rates of all and major haemorrhage may be related to long-term anticoagulation for non-valvular indications and the length of follow-up of this cohort. Trial registration: NCT02088554 (www.clinicaltrials.gov)

Symptomatic and Asymptomatic Neurological Complications of Infective Endocarditis: Impact on Surgical Management and Prognosis

International audienceObjectives:Symptomatic neurological complications (NC) are a major cause of mortality in infective endocarditis (IE) but the impact of asymptomatic complications is unknown. We aimed to assess the impact of asymptomatic NC (AsNC) on the management and prognosis of IE.Methods: From the database of cases collected for a population-based study on IE, we selected 283 patients with definite left-sided IE who had undergone at least one neuroimaging procedure (cerebral CT scan and/or MRI) performed as part of initial evaluation.Results Among those 283 patients, 100 had symptomatic neurological complications (SNC) prior to the investigation, 35 had an asymptomatic neurological complications (AsNC), and 148 had a normal cerebral imaging (NoNC). The rate of valve surgery was 43% in the 100 patients with SNC, 77% in the 35 with AsNC, and 54% in the 148 with NoNC (p<0.001). In-hospital mortality was 42% in patients with SNC, 8.6% in patients with AsNC, and 16.9% in patients with NoNC (p<0.001). Among the 135 patients with NC, 95 had an indication for valve surgery (71%), which was performed in 70 of them (mortality 20%) and not performed in 25 (mortality 68%). In a multivariate adjusted analysis of the 135 patients with NC, age, renal failure, septic shock, and IE caused by S. aureus were independently associated with in-hospital and 1-year mortality. In addition SNC was an independent predictor of 1-year mortality.Conclusions The presence of NC was associated with a poorer prognosis when symptomatic. Patients with AsNC had the highest rate of valve surgery and the lowest mortality rate, which suggests a protective role of surgery guided by systematic neuroimaging results

Are antifibrinolytic drugs equivalent in reducing blood loss and transfusion in cardiac surgery? A meta-analysis of randomized head-to-head trials

BACKGROUND: Aprotinin has been shown to be effective in reducing peri-operative blood loss and the need for re-operation due to continued bleeding in cardiac surgery. The lysine analogues tranexamic acid (TXA) and epsilon aminocaproic acid (EACA) are cheaper, but it is not known if they are as effective as aprotinin. METHODS: Studies were identified by searching electronic databases and bibliographies of published articles. Data from head-to-head trials were pooled using a conventional (Cochrane) meta-analytic approach and a Bayesian approach which estimated the posterior probability of TXA and EACA being equivalent to aprotinin; we used as a non-inferiority boundary a 20% increase in the rates of transfusion or re-operation because of bleeding. RESULTS: Peri-operative blood loss was significantly greater with TXA and EACA than with aprotinin: weighted mean differences were 106 mls (95% CI 37 to 227 mls) and 185 mls (95% CI 134 to 235 mls) respectively. The pooled relative risks (RR) of receiving an allogeneic red blood cell (RBC) transfusion with TXA and EACA, compared with aprotinin, were 1.08 (95% CI 0.88 to 1.32) and 1.14 (95% CI 0.84 to 1.55) respectively. The equivalent Bayesian posterior mean relative risks were 1.15 (95% Bayesian Credible Interval [BCI] 0.90 to 1.68) and 1.21 (95% BCI 0.79 to 1.82) respectively. For transfusion, using a 20% non-inferiority boundary, the posterior probabilities of TXA and EACA being non-inferior to aprotinin were 0.82 and 0.76 respectively. For re-operation the Cochrane RR for TXA vs. aprotinin was 0.98 (95% CI 0.51 to 1.88), compared with a posterior mean Bayesian RR of 0.63 (95% BCI 0.16 to 1.46). The posterior probability of TXA being non-inferior to aprotinin was 0.92, but this was sensitive to the inclusion of one small trial. CONCLUSION: The available data are conflicting regarding the equivalence of lysine analogues and aprotinin in reducing peri-operative bleeding, transfusion and the need for re-operation. Decisions are sensitive to the choice of clinical outcome and non-inferiority boundary. The data are an uncertain basis for replacing aprotinin with the cheaper lysine analogues in clinical practice. Progress has been hampered by small trials and failure to study clinically relevant outcomes

The ARCH Projects: design and rationale (IAASSG 001)

OBJECTIVE A number of factors limit the effectiveness of current aortic arch studies in assessing optimal neuroprotection strategies, including insufficient patient numbers, heterogenous definitions of clinical variables, multiple technical strategies, inadequate reporting of surgical outcomes and a lack of collaborative effort. We have formed an international coalition of centres to provide more robust investigations into this topic. METHODS High-volume aortic arch centres were identified from the literature and contacted for recruitment. A Research Steering Committee of expert arch surgeons was convened to oversee the direction of the research. RESULTS The International Aortic Arch Surgery Study Group has been formed by 41 arch surgeons from 10 countries to better evaluate patient outcomes after aortic arch surgery. Several projects, including the establishment of a multi-institutional retrospective database, randomized controlled trials and a prospectively collected database, are currently underway. CONCLUSIONS Such a collaborative effort will herald a turning point in the surgical management of aortic arch pathologies and will provide better powered analyses to assess the impact of varying surgical techniques on mortality and morbidity, identify predictors for neurological and operative risk, formulate and validate risk predictor models and review long-term survival outcomes and quality-of-life after arch surger