Predictors of mortality following corevalve transcatheter aortic valve implantation: results from the ADVANCE study

n/

Impact of Anesthesia Type on Outcomes of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (from the Multicenter ADVANCE Study).

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has become the standard of care for many patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis who are at increased risk of morbidity and mortality during surgical aortic valve replacement. However, there is still no general consensus regarding the use of general anesthesia (GA) versus local anesthesia with sedation (non-GA) during the TAVI procedure. Using propensity score-matching analysis, we analyzed the characteristics and outcomes of patients who underwent TAVI with either GA (n = 245) or non-GA (n = 245) in the fully monitored, international, CoreValve ADVANCE Study. No statistically significant differences existed between the non-GA and GA groups in all-cause mortality (25.4% vs 23.9%, p = 0.78), cardiovascular mortality (16.4% vs 16.6%, p = 0.92), or stroke (5.2% vs 6.9%, p = 0.57) through 2-year follow-up. Major vascular complications were more common in the non-GA group. Total hospital stay was similar between the 2 groups. Conversion from non-GA to GA occurred in 13 patients (5.3%) because of procedural complications in 9 patients and discomfort or restlessness in 4 patients. Most procedural complications were related to valve positioning or vascular issues. Two of the 13 converted patients died during the procedure. Both GA and non-GA are widely used in real-world TAVI practice, and the decision appears to be guided by only a few patient-related factors and dominated by local and national practice. The outcomes of both anesthesia modes are equally good. When conversion from non-GA did occur, the complication requiring GA affected outcomes

Use of a Repositionable and Fully Retrievable Aortic Valve in Routine Clinical Practice: The RESPOND Study and RESPOND Extension Cohort

Objectives: The authors sought to evaluate 1-year clinical outcomes with the Lotus valve (Boston Scientific, Marlborough, Massachusetts) in a large international, multicenter prospective registry including patients eligible for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) based on heart team consensus. Background: TAVR is a safe and effective treatment for severe aortic valve stenosis; however, limited data are available on TAVR with the repositionable and fully retrievable Lotus valve in unrestricted contemporary clinical practice. Methods: The RESPOND (Repositionable Lotus Valve System—Post-Market Evaluation of Real World Clinical Outcomes) study enrolled 1,014 patients; 996 patients were implanted with the Lotus valve (mean age 80.8 years, 50.8% female, mean STS score 6.0 ± 6.9%). The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality in the intent-to-treat population at 30 days and 1 year. An Extension cohort of 50 patients was treated with the Lotus valve with Depth Guard including a modified delivery system. Mortality and stroke were independently adjudicated. An independent core laboratory assessed echocardiographic data. Results: One-year clinical follow-up was available for 99.9% of Lotus valve-treated patients. At 1 year, the all-cause mortality rate was 11.7% and 4.1% of patients had experienced a disabling stroke. The permanent pacemaker implantation rate was 32% (37% among pacemaker-naive patients). Echocardiographic data at 1 year were available for core laboratory assessment in 62.6% of patients. Paravalvular leak was absent or trace in 94.5%, mild in 5.1%, and moderate in 0.4% of patients. Data from the Extension cohort confirmed good clinical outcomes at 30 days with an 18% permanent pacemaker rate (20% among pacemaker-naive patients). Conclusions: One-year outcomes from the RESPOND study confirm the safety and efficacy of the Lotus valve when used in routine clinical practice. (Repositionable Lotus Valve System—Post-Market Evaluation of Real World Clinical Outcomes [RESPOND]; NCT02031302

Clinical outcomes of the Lotus Valve in patients with bicuspid aortic valve stenosis: An analysis from the RESPOND study

Aims: Patients with bicuspid valves represent a challenging anatomical subgroup for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). This analysis evaluated the clinical outcomes of the fully repositionable and retrievable Lotus Valve System in patients with bicuspid aortic valves enrolled in the RESPOND post-market registry. Methods and Results: The prospective, open-label RESPOND study enrolled 1,014 patients at 41 centers in Europe, New Zealand, and Latin America, 31 (3.1%) of whom had bicuspid aortic valves. The mean age in the bicuspid patient cohort was 76.4 years, 64.5% were male, and the baseline STS score was 6.0 ± 10.2. Procedural success was 100%, with no cases of malpositioning, valve migration, embolization, or valve-in-valve. Repositioning was attempted in 10 cases (32.3%). There was one death (3.2%) and one stroke (3.2%) at 30-day follow-up. Mean AV gradient was reduced from 48.7 ± 17.0 mmHg at baseline to 11.8 ± 5.1 mmHg at hospital discharge (P < 0.001); mean effective orifice area (EOA

Cardio-anesthesiology considerations for the trans-catheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) procedure

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has become the mainstay for highrisk or inoperable patients with symptomatic aortic valve stenosis, and research regarding the use of transcatheter valves in intermediate or low-risk patients is currently ongoing. The aim of this article is to provide comprehensive insight into the anesthetic management of patients undergoing TAVI and to highlight possible gaps in the current knowledge. One important procedural characteristic that is imperative to consider is the type of anesthesia being used and its possible complications. Increasingly, experienced centers have changed from general anesthesia with endotracheal intubation to local anesthesia with sedation, especially when the transfemoral access route is used for TAVI. There is still debate regarding what type of anesthesia should be used in the procedure, and the lack of randomized data makes it even more challenging for the operators © 2016 Hellenic Society of Cardiology

Clinical course of three postoperative symptomatic COVID-19 cases in patients after lung lobectomy.

The novel coronavirus disease 2019 is a highly contagious viral infection caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 virus. Its rapid spread and severe clinical presentation influence patient management in all specialties including thoracic surgery. We report 3 cases of coronavirus disease 2019 occurring in patients shortly after thoracotomy and thoracoscopy procedures, illustrating the imminent threat of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection for thoracic surgery patients