Impact of route of access and stenosis subtype on outcome after transcatheter aortic valve replacement

Introduction: Previous analyses have reported the outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) for patients with low-flow, low-gradient (LFLG) aortic stenosis (AS), without stratifying according to the route of access. Differences in mortality rates among access routes have been established for high-gradient (HG) patients and hypothesized to be even more pronounced in LFLG AS patients. This study aims to compare the outcomes of patients with LFLG or HG AS following transfemoral (TF) or transapical (TA) TAVR. Methods: A total of 910 patients, who underwent either TF or TA TAVR with a median follow-up of 2.22 (IQR: 1.22-4.03) years, were included in this multicenter cohort study. In total, 146 patients (16.04%) suffered from LFLG AS. The patients with HG and LFLG AS were stratified according to the route of access and compared statistically. Results: The operative mortality rates of patients with HG and LFLG were found to be comparable following TF access. The operative mortality rate was significantly increased for patients who underwent TA access [odds ratio (OR): 2.91 (1.54-5.48), p = 0.001] and patients with LFLG AS [OR: 2.27 (1.13-4.56), p = 0.02], which could be corroborated in a propensity score-matched subanalysis. The observed increase in the risk of operative mortality demonstrated an additive effect [OR for TA LFLG: 5.45 (2.35-12.62), p < 0.001]. LFLG patients who underwent TA access had significantly higher operative mortality rates (17.78%) compared with TF LFLG (3.96%, p = 0.016) and TA HG patients (6.36%, p = 0.024). Conclusions: HG patients experienced a twofold increase in operative mortality rates following TA compared with TF access, while LFLG patients had a fivefold increase in operative mortality rates. TA TAVR appears suboptimal for patients with LFLG AS. Prospective studies should be conducted to evaluate alternative options in cases where TF is not possible

Impact of route of access and stenosis subtype on outcome after transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

INTRODUCTION Previous analyses have reported the outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) for patients with low-flow, low-gradient (LFLG) aortic stenosis (AS), without stratifying according to the route of access. Differences in mortality rates among access routes have been established for high-gradient (HG) patients and hypothesized to be even more pronounced in LFLG AS patients. This study aims to compare the outcomes of patients with LFLG or HG AS following transfemoral (TF) or transapical (TA) TAVR. METHODS A total of 910 patients, who underwent either TF or TA TAVR with a median follow-up of 2.22 (IQR: 1.22-4.03) years, were included in this multicenter cohort study. In total, 146 patients (16.04%) suffered from LFLG AS. The patients with HG and LFLG AS were stratified according to the route of access and compared statistically. RESULTS The operative mortality rates of patients with HG and LFLG were found to be comparable following TF access. The operative mortality rate was significantly increased for patients who underwent TA access [odds ratio (OR): 2.91 (1.54-5.48), p = 0.001] and patients with LFLG AS [OR: 2.27 (1.13-4.56), p = 0.02], which could be corroborated in a propensity score-matched subanalysis. The observed increase in the risk of operative mortality demonstrated an additive effect [OR for TA LFLG: 5.45 (2.35-12.62), p < 0.001]. LFLG patients who underwent TA access had significantly higher operative mortality rates (17.78%) compared with TF LFLG (3.96%, p = 0.016) and TA HG patients (6.36%, p = 0.024). CONCLUSIONS HG patients experienced a twofold increase in operative mortality rates following TA compared with TF access, while LFLG patients had a fivefold increase in operative mortality rates. TA TAVR appears suboptimal for patients with LFLG AS. Prospective studies should be conducted to evaluate alternative options in cases where TF is not possible

A Neuronal Network-Based Score Predicting Survival in Patients Undergoing Aortic Valve Intervention: The ABC-AS Score.

Background: Despite being the most commonly performed valvular intervention, risk prediction for aortic valve replacement in patients with severe aortic stenosis by currently used risk scores remains challenging. The study aim was to develop a biomarker-based risk score by means of a neuronal network. Methods: In this multicenter study, 3595 patients were divided into test and validation cohorts (70% to 30%) by random allocation. Input variables to develop the ABC-AS score were age, the cardiac biomarker high-sensitivity troponin T, and a patient history of cardiac decompensation. The validation cohort was used to verify the scores' value and for comparison with the Society of Thoracic Surgery Predictive Risk of Operative Mortality score. Results: Receiver operating curves demonstrated an improvement in prediction by using the ABC-AS score compared to the Society of Thoracic Surgery Predictive Risk of Operative Mortality (STS prom) score. Although the difference in predicting cardiovascular mortality was most notable at 30-day follow-up (area under the curve of 0.922 versus 0.678), ABC-AS also performed better in overall follow-up (0.839 versus 0.699). Furthermore, univariate analysis of ABC-AS tertiles yielded highly significant differences for all-cause (p < 0.0001) and cardiovascular mortality (p < 0.0001). Head-to-head comparison between both risk scores in a multivariable cox regression model underlined the potential of the ABC-AS score (HR per z-unit 2.633 (95% CI 2.156-3.216), p < 0.0001), while the STS prom score failed to reach statistical significance (p = 0.226). Conclusions: The newly developed ABC-AS score is an improved risk stratification tool to predict cardiovascular outcomes for patients undergoing aortic valve intervention

institute for biomedical engineering

Model-based segmentation techniques for fast volume conductor generatio

Impact of route of access and stenosis subtype on outcome after transcatheter aortic valve replacement

IntroductionPrevious analyses have reported the outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) for patients with low-flow, low-gradient (LFLG) aortic stenosis (AS), without stratifying according to the route of access. Differences in mortality rates among access routes have been established for high-gradient (HG) patients and hypothesized to be even more pronounced in LFLG AS patients. This study aims to compare the outcomes of patients with LFLG or HG AS following transfemoral (TF) or transapical (TA) TAVR.MethodsA total of 910 patients, who underwent either TF or TA TAVR with a median follow-up of 2.22 (IQR: 1.22–4.03) years, were included in this multicenter cohort study. In total, 146 patients (16.04%) suffered from LFLG AS. The patients with HG and LFLG AS were stratified according to the route of access and compared statistically.ResultsThe operative mortality rates of patients with HG and LFLG were found to be comparable following TF access. The operative mortality rate was significantly increased for patients who underwent TA access [odds ratio (OR): 2.91 (1.54–5.48), p = 0.001] and patients with LFLG AS [OR: 2.27 (1.13–4.56), p = 0.02], which could be corroborated in a propensity score-matched subanalysis. The observed increase in the risk of operative mortality demonstrated an additive effect [OR for TA LFLG: 5.45 (2.35–12.62), p &lt; 0.001]. LFLG patients who underwent TA access had significantly higher operative mortality rates (17.78%) compared with TF LFLG (3.96%, p = 0.016) and TA HG patients (6.36%, p = 0.024).ConclusionsHG patients experienced a twofold increase in operative mortality rates following TA compared with TF access, while LFLG patients had a fivefold increase in operative mortality rates. TA TAVR appears suboptimal for patients with LFLG AS. Prospective studies should be conducted to evaluate alternative options in cases where TF is not possible

Long-term performance of an atrial lead capable of accelerometer based detection of cardiac contractility in patients receiving cardiac resynchronisation therapy.

OBJECTIVES:To evaluate the long-term performance of the SonRtip atrial lead. BACKGROUND:To optimize atrioventricular and interventricular timing and thereby potentially improving cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) responder rates, a lead integrated technology and a cardioverter/defibrillator-based algorithm measuring peak endocardial acceleration have been introduced. Long-term performance of the atrial lead (SonRtip PS55D, Sorin/MicroPort CRM, Italy) embedded with such a sensor has not been reported so far. METHODS:Between 2012 and 2018, 143 patients underwent implantation of the SonRtip atrial lead in four Austrian medical centers. Conventional bipolar atrial leads implanted during the same period in 526 patients receiving CRT were used as control cohort. RESULTS:Among 669 patients included in the study, 10 (1.5%) showed increased atrial pacing thresholds and/or decreased atrial sensing amplitudes and/or sudden increase in atrial lead impedance (above 3000 Ω) after an uneventful early postoperative period. Seven (70%) of the malfunctioning leads were SonRtip leads (p <0.001). Lead replacement was needed in 4.2% of SonRtip leads (six out of 143) and in 0.38% of all other conventional atrial leads (two out of 526) (p <0.001). Because of unaltered atrial sensing properties, a wait and see strategy was chosen in two patients-one of them with a SonRtip lead. The implanted atrial lead in the latter person experienced a sudden increase in pacing threshold (4V/0.35ms). CONCLUSIONS:While short-term safety and stable technical performance of the SonRtip atrial lead could be confirmed, our study found an unexpectedly high malfunction rate over a longer follow-up period