Surgical Treatment of Acute Myocardial Infarction

In recent years, advances in surgical techniques and perioperative management of cardiac surgical patients have facilitated more aggressive operative treatment of many serious and even catastrophic complications of acute myocardial infarction (Ml). In addition, improved understanding of the natural history of these complications has helped to optimize the indications for and timing of surgical intervention. The role of emergency revascularization for postinfarction angina, evolving acute MI, cardiogenic shock after acute MI, and failed percutaneous transluminal angioplasty has expanded with overall satisfactory to excellent results. Surgical treatment of mechanical complications of acute Ml such as free-wall rupture, acute ischemic mitral insufficiency, and ventricular septal defect also is undertaken earlier and more aggressively. Although the mortality rates for these conditions remain higher than desired, salvage of many previously doomed patients now is a reality

Valve-in-valve Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement for Failed Surgical Valves and Adjunctive Therapies

While redo surgical aortic valve replacement has traditionally been the gold standard for the treatment of failed surgical valves, valve-in-valve (ViV) transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has arisen as a viable, less invasive option with the potential for improved short-term morbidity and mortality. Retrospective registry data regarding ViV TAVR outcomes have been encouraging, with excellent 1-year mortality, and sustained valve performance and quality of life improvement out to 3 years. Operators must be comfortable with CT analysis for procedural planning, and be able to identify and troubleshoot patients who are at risk for coronary obstruction and patient prosthesis mismatch. The authors provide a review of clinical outcomes associated with ViV TAVR, procedural planning recommendations, and strategies to overcome technical challenges that can occur during ViV TAVR

Short and long term outcomes of 200 patients supported by continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices

AIM: To study the institutional experience over 8 years with 200 continuous-flow (CF) - left ventricular assist devices (LVAD). METHODS: We evaluated our institution\u27s LVAD database and analyzed all patients who received a CF LVAD as a bridge to transplant (BTT) or destination therapy from March 2006 until June 2014. We identified 200 patients, of which 179 were implanted with a HeartMate II device (Thoratec Corp., Pleasanton, CA) and 21 received a Heartware HVAD (HeartWare Inc., Framingham, MA). RESULTS: The mean age of our LVAD recipients was 59.3 years (range 17-81), 76% (152/200) were males, and 49% were implanted for the indication of BTT. The survival rate for our LVAD patients at 30 d, 6 mo, 12 mo, 2 years, 3 years, and 4 years was 94%, 86%, 78%, 71%, 62% and 45% respectively. The mean duration of LVAD support was 581 d (range 2-2595 d). Gastrointestinal bleeding (was the most common adverse event (43/200, 21%), followed by right ventricular failure (38/200, 19%), stroke (31/200, 15%), re exploration for bleeding (31/200, 15%), ventilator dependent respiratory failure (19/200, 9%) and pneumonia (15/200, 7%). Our driveline infection rate was 7%. Pump thrombosis occurred in 6% of patients. Device exchanged was needed in 6% of patients. On multivariate analysis, preoperative liver dysfunction, ventilator dependent respiratory failure, tracheostomy and right ventricular failure requiring right ventricular assist device support were significant predictors of post LVAD survival. CONCLUSION: Short and long term survival for patients on LVAD support are excellent, although outcomes still remain inferior compared to heart transplantation. The incidence of driveline infections, pump thrombosis and pump exchange have declined significantly in recent years

Caval-Aortic Access to Allow Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Otherwise Ineligible Patients Initial Human Experience

ObjectivesThis study describes the first use of caval-aortic access and closure to enable transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in patients who lacked other access options. Caval-aortic access refers to percutaneous entry into the abdominal aorta from the femoral vein through the adjoining inferior vena cava.BackgroundTAVR is attractive in high-risk or inoperable patients with severe aortic stenosis. Available transcatheter valves require large introducer sheaths, which are a risk for major vascular complications or preclude TAVR altogether. Caval-aortic access has been successful in animals.MethodsWe performed a single-center retrospective review of procedural and 30-day outcomes of prohibitive-risk patients who underwent TAVR via caval-aortic access.ResultsBetween July 2013 and January 2014, 19 patients underwent TAVR via caval-aortic access; 79% were women. Caval-aortic access and tract closure were successful in all 19 patients; TAVR was successful in 17 patients. Six patients experienced modified VARC-2 major vascular complications, 2 (11%) of whom required intervention. Most (79%) required blood transfusion. There were no deaths attributable to caval-aortic access. Throughout the 111 (range 39 to 229) days of follow up, there were no post-discharge complications related to tract creation or closure. All patients had persistent aorto-caval flow immediately post-procedure. Of the 16 patients who underwent repeat imaging after the first week, 15 (94%) had complete closure of the residual aorto-caval tract.ConclusionsPercutaneous transcaval venous access to the aorta allows TAVR in otherwise ineligible patients, and may offer a new access strategy for other applications requiring large transcatheter implants

Can We Predict Skeletal Lesion on Bone Scan Based on Quantitative PSMA PET/CT Features?

Objective: The increasing use of PSMA-PET/CT for restaging prostate cancer (PCa) leads to a patient shift from a non-metastatic situation based on conventional imaging (CI) to a metastatic situation. Since established therapeutic pathways have been designed according to CI, it is unclear how this should be translated to the PSMA-PET/CT results. This study aimed to investigate whether PSMA-PET/CT and clinical parameters could predict the visibility of PSMA-positive lesions on a bone scan (BS). Methods: In four different centers, all PCa patients with BS and PSMA-PET/CT within 6 months without any change in therapy or significant disease progression were retrospectively selected. Up to 10 non-confluent clear bone metastases were selected per PSMA-PET/CT and SUVmax, SUVmean, PSMAtot, PSMAvol, density, diameter on CT, and presence of cortical erosion were collected. Clinical variables (age, PSA, Gleason Score) were also considered. Two experienced double-board physicians decided whether a bone metastasis was visible on the BS, with a consensus readout for discordant findings. For predictive performance, a random forest was fit on all available predictors, and its accuracy was assessed using 10-fold cross-validation performed 10 times. Results: A total of 43 patients were identified with 222 bone lesions on PSMA-PET/CT. A total of 129 (58.1%) lesions were visible on the BS. In the univariate analysis, all PSMA-PET/CT parameters were significantly associated with the visibility on the BS (p < 0.001). The random forest reached a mean accuracy of 77.6% in a 10-fold cross-validation. Conclusions: These preliminary results indicate that there might be a way to predict the BS results based on PSMA-PET/CT, potentially improving the comparability between both examinations and supporting decisions for therapy selection

Evolving trends in aortic valve replacement: A statewide experience

BackgroundTranscatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is an alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for the treatment of aortic stenosis in patients at intermediate, high, and extreme risk for mortality from SAVR. We examined recent trends in aortic valve replacement (AVR) in Michigan.MethodsThe Michigan Society of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgeons Quality Collaborative (MSTCVS‐QC) database was used to determine the number of SAVR and TAVR cases performed from January 2012 through June 2017. Patients were divided into low, intermediate, high, and extreme risk groups based on STS predicted risk of mortality (PROM). TAVR patients in the MSTCVS‐QC database were also matched with those in the Transcatheter Valve Therapy Registry to determine their Heart Team‐designated risk category.ResultsDuring the study period 9517 SAVR and 4470 TAVR cases were performed. Total annual AVR volume increased by 40.0% (from 2086 to 2920), with a 13.3% decrease in number of SAVR cases (from 1892 to 1640) and a 560% increase in number of TAVR cases (from 194 to 1280). Greater than 90% of SAVR patients had PROM ≤8%. While >70% of TAVR patients had PROM ≤ 8%, they were mostly designated as high or extreme risk by a Heart Team.ConclusionsDuring the study period, SAVR volume gradually declined and TAVR volume dramatically increased. This was mostly due to a new group of patients with lower STS PROM who were designated as higher risk by a Heart Team due to characteristics not completely captured by the STS PROM score.Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/145246/1/jocs13740_am.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/145246/2/jocs13740.pd

BASILICA Trial: One-Year Outcomes of Transcatheter Electrosurgical Leaflet Laceration to Prevent TAVR Coronary Obstruction

Background: Coronary artery obstruction is a rare, devastating complication of transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Transcatheter electrosurgical aortic leaflet laceration (Bioprosthetic or Native Aortic Scallop Intentional Laceration to Prevent Iatrogenic Coronary Artery Obstruction [BASILICA]) is a novel technique to prevent coronary artery obstruction. We report the 1-year outcomes of the BASILICA trial. Primary end points of 30-day success and safety have been reported previously. Methods: The BASILICA trial was a prospective, multicenter, single-arm safety and feasibility study. Subjects with severe native or bioprosthetic aortic valve disease at high or extreme risk for surgery, and high risk of coronary artery obstruction, were included. End points at 1 year included death, stroke, and myocardial infarction. Source data was independently verified and end points independently adjudicated. Results: Thirty subjects were enrolled between February 2018 and July 2018. At 30 days, BASILICA was successful in 28 subjects (93.3%), there were 3 strokes (10%), including 1 disabling stroke (3.3%), 1 death (3.3%), and 1 periprocedural myocardial infarction (3.3%). Between 30 days and 1 year, there were no additional strokes, no myocardial infarction, and 2 deaths (10% 1-year mortality). No subject needed repeat intervention for aortic valve or coronary disease. Two subjects had infective endocarditis (6.7%), but neither was isolated to the aortic valve. There were no hospital admissions for heart failure. Fourteen (46.7%) subjects required repeat hospital admission for other causes. Aortic valve gradients on echocardiography, New York Heart Association functional class, and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire scores improved from baseline to 30 days and were maintained at 1 year. Conclusions: In these subjects with multiple comorbidities and restrictive anatomy that underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement, there was no late stroke, myocardial infarction, or death related to BASILICA. Mitigation of coronary obstruction remained intact at 1 year and was not related to recurrent readmission. These results are reassuring for patients and physicians who wish to avoid the long-term complications related to snorkel stenting

Trends in surgical aortic valve replacement in pre- and post-transcatheter aortic valve replacement eras at a structural heart center

BackgroundThe advent of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has directly impacted the lifelong management of patients with aortic valve disease. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has approved TAVR for all surgical risk: prohibitive (2011), high (2012), intermediate (2016), and low (2019). Since then, TAVR volumes are increasing and surgical aortic valve replacements (SAVR) are decreasing. This study sought to evaluate trends in isolated SAVR in the pre- and post-TAVR eras.MethodsFrom January 2000 to June 2020, 3,861 isolated SAVRs were performed at a single academic quaternary care institution which participated in the early trials of TAVR beginning in 2007. A formal structural heart center was established in 2012 when TAVR became commercially available. Patients were divided into the pre-TAVR era (2000–2011, n = 2,426) and post-TAVR era (2012–2020, n = 1,435). Data from the institutional Society of Thoracic Surgeons National Database was analyzed.ResultsThe median age was 66 years, similar between groups. The post-TAVR group had a statistically higher rate of diabetes, hypertension, dyslipidemia, heart failure, more reoperative SAVR, and lower STS Predicted Risk of Mortality (PROM) (2.0% vs. 2.5%, p &lt; 0.0001). There were more urgent/emergent/salvage SAVRs (38% vs. 24%) and fewer elective SAVRs (63% vs. 76%), (p &lt; 0.0001) in the post-TAVR group. More bioprosthetic valves were implanted in the post-TAVR group (85% vs. 74%, p &lt; 0.0001). Larger aortic valves were implanted (25 vs. 23 mm, p &lt; 0.0001) and more annular enlargements were performed (5.9% vs. 1.6%, p &lt; 0.0001) in the post-TAVR era. Postoperatively, the post-TAVR group had less blood product transfusion (49% vs. 58%, p &lt; 0.0001), renal failure (1.4% vs. 4.3%, p &lt; 0.0001), pneumonia (2.3% vs. 3.8%, p = 0.01), shorter lengths of stay, and lower in-hospital mortality (1.5% vs. 3.3%, p = 0.0007).ConclusionThe approval of TAVR changed the landscape of aortic valve disease management. At a quaternary academic cardiac surgery center with a well-established structural heart program, patients undergoing isolated SAVR in the post-TAVR era had lower STS PROM, more implantation of bioprosthetic valves, utilization of larger valves, annular enlargement, and lower in-hospital mortality. Isolated SAVR continues to be performed in the TAVR era with excellent outcomes. SAVR remains an essential tool in the lifetime management of aortic valve disease