Radiation-Associated Valvular Disease

Contemporary experience with the Commando procedure for anterior mitral anular calcification

Objective

Anterior mitral anular calcification, particularly in radiation heart disease, and previous valve replacement with destroyed intervalvular fibrosa are challenging for prosthesis sizing and placement. The Commando procedure with intervalvular fibrosa reconstruction permits double-valve replacement in these challenging conditions. We referenced outcomes after Commando procedures to standard double-valve replacements.

Methods

From January 2011 to January 2022, 129 Commando procedures and 1191 aortic and mitral double-valve replacements were performed at the Cleveland Clinic, excluding endocarditis. Reasons for the Commando were severe calcification after radiation (n = 67), without radiation (n = 43), and others (n = 19). Commando procedures were referenced to a subset of double-valve replacements using balancing-score methods (109 pairs).

Results

Between balanced groups, Commando versus double-valve replacement had higher total calcium scores (median 6140 vs 2680 HU, P = .03). Hospital outcomes were similar, including operative mortality (12/11% vs 8/7.3%, P = .35) and reoperation for bleeding (9/8.3% vs 5/4.6%, P = .28). Survival and freedom from reoperation at 5 years were 54% versus 67% (P = .33) and 87% versus 100% (P = .04), respectively. Higher calcium score was associated with lower survival after double-valve replacement but not after the Commando. The Commando procedure had lower aortic valve mean gradients at 4 years (9.4 vs 11 mm Hg, P = .04). After Commando procedures for calcification, 5-year survival was 60% and 59% with and without radiation, respectively (P = .47).

Conclusions

The Commando procedure with reconstruction of the intervalvular fibrosa destroyed by mitral anular calcification, radiation, or previous surgery demonstrates acceptable outcomes similar to standard double-valve replacement. More experience and long-term outcomes are required to refine patient selection for and application of the Commando approach.

Uncommon short- and long-term cardiological side effects of thoracic radiation: a report of two cases

Radiotherapy is an essential treatment of more than 50% of oncohematological patients. Pericardial disorders and valvular heart disease are two common radiotherapy complications. Acute pericarditis is infrequent and usually underdiagnosed. Therefore, diagnostic suspicion and early treatment are mandatory to avoid the evolution to constrictive pericarditis. The prevalence of radiation-induced valvular heart disease is common in patients with a history of Hodgkin's lymphoma and breast cancer. It has distinctive characteristics from other etiologies and, thus, different therapeutic approaches. We present two cases of unusual complications of radiotherapy; the first one in the acute setting and the second one during the follow-up in the chronic phase. A multidisciplinary and individualized approach with specific considerations is decisive in the management of these patients.

The Global Burden of Valvular Heart Disease: From Clinical Epidemiology to Management

Valvular heart disease is a leading cause of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality and a major contributor of symptoms and functional disability. Knowledge of valvular heart disease epidemiology and a deep comprehension of the geographical and temporal trends are crucial for clinical advances and the formulation of effective health policy for primary and secondary prevention. This review mainly focuses on the epidemiology of primary (organic, related to the valve itself) valvular disease and its management, especially emphasizing the importance of heart valve centers in ensuring the best care of patients through a multidisciplinary team.

Development of deep-inspiration breath-hold system that monitors the position of the chest wall using infrared rangefinder

We conducted a prospective study to quantitatively evaluate the movement of the chest wall to establish the simple and reproducible deep-inspiration breath-hold (DIBH) method. The left nipple position was monitored to confirm the inspiratory state. Planning computed tomography (CT) was performed under DIBH and free-breath. We conducted radiation plans with DIBH and free-breath CT and evaluated organ at risk (OAR) and target doses according to two different plans. The relationship between positioning errors of the chest wall and patient factors was evaluated using univariate analysis and fixed-effects models. Twenty-three patients aged ≤ 60 years were enrolled during January-August 2021; 358 daily radiation treatments were evaluated. The median time of treatment room occupancy was 16 minutes (interquartile range, 14-20). The area of the planning target volume (PTV) surrounded by the 95% isodose line was more extensive in DIBH than in free breathing (71.6% vs 69.5%, P < 0.01), whereas the cardiac and left anterior descending (LAD) artery doses were lower (both P < 0.01). In the fixed-effects model analysis, the occupation time of the treatment room was correlated with positioning error. The difference between the planned and irradiated dose was the largest in the LAD branch of the coronary artery (-2.5 Gy), although the OAR dose decreased owing to positional error. The current DIBH method, wherein a single point on the chest wall is monitored to confirm that the patient is in an inspiratory state, allows radiation to be performed in a short time with a small dose error.

Chest Pain in the Cancer Patient

Chest pain is one of the most common presenting symptoms in patients seeking care from a physician. Risk assessment tools and scores have facilitated prompt diagnosis and optimal management in these patients; however, it is unclear as to whether a standardised approach can adequately triage chest pain in cancer patients and survivors. This is of concern because cancer patients are often at an increased risk of cardiovascular mortality and morbidity given the shared risk factors between cancer and cardiovascular disease, compounded by the fact that certain anti-cancer therapies are associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events that can persist for weeks and even years after treatment. This article describes the underlying mechanisms of the most common causes of chest pain in cancer patients with an emphasis on how their management may differ to that of non-cancer patients with chest pain. It will also highlight the role of the cardio-oncology team, who can aid in identifying cancer therapy-related cardiovascular side-effects and provide optimal multidisciplinary care for these patients.