Feasibility and Early Safety of Single-Stage Hybrid Coronary Intervention and Valvular Cardiac Surgery

Concomitant Valve Replacement and Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Surgery: Lessons from the Past, Guidance for the Future? A Mortality Analysis in 294 Patients

OBJECTIVE

The aims of this study were to analyze parameters influencing early and late mortality after concomitant valve replacement and coronary artery bypass grafting surgery, using early and long-term information from an institutionally available data registry, and to discuss the results in relation to the current treatment strategies and perspectives.

METHODS

The study population consisted of 294 patients after combined valve replacement with mechanical prosthesis and CABG surgery.

RESULTS

There were 201 men (68.4%) and 93 women (31.6%). Concurrent to the coronary artery bypass grafting, 238 patients (80.9%) underwent aortic-, 46 patients (15.6%) mitral- and 10 patients (3.4%) doublevalve replacement. Cumulative duration of follow up was 1007 patient-years (py) with a maximum of 94 months and was completed in 92.2% (271 cases). Overall hospital mortality (30 days) rate was 6.5% (n = 19). It was significantly higher in patients of female gender, older than 70 y, in those suffering preoperative myocardial infarction, presenting with an additive EuroScore > 8 and being hemodynamically unstable after the operation. Cumulative survival rate at 7.6 y was 78.6%. Determinants of prolonged survival were male gender, age at operation < 70 y, preoperative sinus rhythm, normal renal function, additive EuroScore < 8 and the use of internal thoracic artery for grafting. Subsequent multivariate analysis revealed preoperative atrial fibrillation (HR: 2.1, 95% CI: 0.82-5.44, p: 0.01) and risk group of ES > 8 (HR: 3.63, 95% CI: 1.45-9.07, p < 0.01) as independent predictors for lower long-term survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Hospital mortality (30 d) was nearly 2.5-fold higher in female and/or older than 70 y patients. Preoperative atrial fibrillation and/ or a calculated ES > 8 were independent predisposing factors of late mortality for combined VR and CABG surgery. Tailoring the approach, with the employment of the newest techniques and hybrid procedures, to the individual patient clinical profile enables favorable outcomes for concomitant valvular disease and CAD, especially in high-risk patients.

Trends and outcomes of concomitant aortic valve replacement and coronary artery bypass grafting in the UK and a survey of practices

OBJECTIVES

Concomitant revascularization of coronary artery disease at the same time as treatment for aortic valvopathy favourably impacts survival. However, combined surgery may be associated with increased adverse outcomes compared to aortic valve replacement (AVR) or coronary artery bypass grafting in isolation.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed all patients who underwent AVR with bypass grafting between February 1996 and March 2019 using data from the National Adult Cardiac Surgery Audit. We used a generalized mixed-effects model to assess the effect of the number and type of bypass grafts associated with surgical AVR on in-hospital mortality, postoperative stroke, and the need for renal dialysis. Furthermore, we conducted an international cross-sectional survey of cardiac surgeons to explore their views about concomitant AVR with coronary bypass grafting interventions.

RESULTS

Fifty-one thousand two hundred and seventy-two patients were included in the study. Patients receiving 2 or more bypass grafts demonstrated more significant preoperative comorbidity and disease severity. Patients undergoing 2 and >2 grafts in addition to AVR had increased mortality as compared to patients undergoing AVR and only 1 graft [odds ratio (OR) 1.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) [1.05-1.30], P = 0.005 and OR 1.15, 95% CI [1.02-1.30], P = 0.024 respectively]. A single arterial conduit was associated with a reduction in mortality (OR 0.75, 95% CI [0.68-0.82], P < 0.001) and postoperative dialysis (OR 0.87, 95% CI [0.78-0.96], P = 0.006), but this association was lost with >1 arterial conduit. One hundred and three surgeons responded to our survey, with only a small majority believing that the number of bypass grafts can influence short- or long-term postoperative outcomes in these patients, and an almost equal split in responders supporting the use of staged or hybrid interventions for patients with concomitant pathology.

CONCLUSIONS

The number of grafts performed during combined AVR and coronary artery bypass grafting is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. The use of an arterial graft was also associated with reduced mortality. Future studies are needed to assess the effect of incomplete revascularization and measure long-term outcomes. Based on our data, current published evidence, and the collective expert opinion we gathered, we endorse future work to investigate the short and long-term efficacy and safety of hybrid intervention for patients with concomitant advanced coronary and aortic valve disease.

Hybrid intervention approach to coronary artery and valvular heart disease

Coronary angiography is used to assess the burden of coronary artery disease prior to surgical valve repair/replacement and often leads to concomitant bypass and valve surgery. We sought to evaluate outcomes of an alternative, hybrid approach involving percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and valve surgery, assessing the rate of stent thrombosis as a primary outcome. We reviewed charts of consecutive patients who underwent planned PCI prior to surgical valve repair/replacement by a single surgeon from January 2008 to December 2016. We calculated rates of surgical complication, duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) prior to surgery, and rates of stent thrombosis and in-stent restenosis. Twenty-four patients were included in this study. Surgery was performed a median of 52.5 days following PCI. DAPT was withheld an average of 8 days before and resumed an average of 4 days after surgery. Ninety-two percent of surgeries were minimally invasive. There were no bleeding complications, stent thromboses, or restenosis events. All patients survived the 1-year follow-up. For patients with mixed coronary and valvular heart disease, a heart team approach involving preoperative PCI followed by staged minimally invasive valvular surgery appears to be safe and warrants further exploration.

Ischemic Mitral Regurgitation: Repair, Replacement or Nothing

The treatment strategy for ischemic mitral regurgitation (MR) continues to evolve with the completion of multicenter trials and the advancement of surgical and percutaneous interventional techniques. This review defines ischemic MR, outlines key clinical trials that assess surgical and interventional approaches, and reports the main elements of recent national guidelines for decision making in treatment of ischemic MR. New findings in percutaneous mitral valve repair and replacement for ischemic MR will also be described. Effective perioperative care of patients with ischemic MR requires clinicians to be well versed in the most up-to-date recommendations and emerging technological developments.

A prediction score for significant coronary artery disease in Chinese patients ≥50 years old referred for rheumatic valvular heart disease surgery

OBJECTIVES

Our goal was to establish a prediction score and protocol for the preoperative prediction of significant coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients with rheumatic valvular heart disease.

METHODS

Using multivariate logistic regression analysis, we validated the model based on 490 patients without a history of myocardial infarction and who underwent preoperative screening coronary angiography. Significant CAD was defined as ≥50% narrowing of the diameter of the lumen of the left main coronary artery or ≥70% narrowing of the diameter of the lumen of the left anterior descending coronary artery, left circumflex artery or right coronary artery.

RESULTS

Significant CAD was present in 9.8% of patients. Age, smoking, diabetes mellitus, diastolic blood pressure, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and ischaemia evident on an electrocardiogram were independently associated with significant CAD and were entered into the multivariate model. According to the logistic regression predictive risk score, preoperative coronary angiography is recommended in (i) postmenopausal women between 50 and 59 years of age with ≥9.1% logistic regression predictive risk score; (ii) postmenopausal women who are ≥60 years old with a logistic regression predictive risk score ≥6.6% and (iii) men ≥50 years old whose logistic regression predictive risk score was ≥2.8%. Based on this predictive model, 246 (50.2%) preoperative coronary angiograms could be safely avoided. The negative predictive value of the model was 98.8% (246 of 249).

CONCLUSIONS

This model was accurate for the preoperative prediction of significant CAD in patients with rheumatic valvular heart disease. This model must be validated in larger cohorts and various populations.

Percutaneous coronary intervention followed by minimally invasive valve surgery compared with median sternotomy coronary artery bypass graft and valve surgery in patients with prior cardiac surgery

BACKGROUND

In patients with prior cardiac surgery requiring re-operative coronary and valve surgery, a hybrid approach of percutaneous coronary intervention followed by minimally invasive valve surgery (PCI + MIVS) may be an alternative to the standard median sternotomy coronary artery bypass and valve surgery (CABG + valve).

METHODS

The outcomes of patients with prior cardiac surgery, presenting with coronary artery and valvular disease, who underwent PCI + MIVS (N=39) were retrospectively compared with those who underwent CABG + valve (N=28) via a repeat median sternotomy, between February 2009 and April 2014.

RESULTS

The mean age for the PCI + MIVS versus CABG + valve group was 75±9 and 72±11 years (P=0.54), respectively. The baseline characteristics were similar between groups, with the exception of a greater prevalence of 1-vessel coronary artery disease and clopidogrel or dual antiplatelet therapy at the time of surgery in the PCI + MIVS group, and more 3-vessel coronary artery disease in those undergoing CABG + valve surgery. The PCI + MIVS approach was associated with a decreased aortic cross-clamp (94 vs. 131 minutes, P=0.001) and cardiopulmonary bypass (128 vs. 190 minutes, P<0.001) times, fewer intraoperative packed red blood transfusions (1.3 vs. 3.8 units, P=0.001), shorter intensive care unit length of stay (41 vs. 71 hours, P<0.001), and decreased incidence of prolonged mechanical ventilation (12.8% vs. 35.7%, P=0.03), re-intubation (2.6% vs. 17.9%, P=0.04), when compared with CABG + valve. The thirty-day and two-year mortality were similar, being 7.7% vs. 7.1% (P=0.66), and 12.8% vs. 10.7% (P=0.55), in the PCI + MIVS vs. CABG + valve group, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Hybrid PCI + MIVS in patients with prior cardiac surgery is associated with shorter operative times and intensive care unit length of stay, less need for intraoperative blood cell transfusions, decreased use of mechanical ventilation, and similar short-term and follow-up survival, when compared with CABG + valve surgery via median sternotomy. Randomized trials and multicenter registries are needed to further evaluate this approach.

Hybrid approach of percutaneous coronary intervention followed by minimally invasive mitral valve surgery: a 5-year single-center experience

BACKGROUND

The current study evaluated the safety and feasibility of staged ("hybrid") percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) followed by isolated minimally invasive mitral valve (MV) surgery [PCI + minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (MIMVS)], for patients with concomitant coronary artery and MV disease.

METHODS

A total of 93 patients who underwent PCI + MIMVS for coronary artery and MV disease between February 2009 and April 2014 were retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

There were 54 (58.1%) men and 39 (41.9%) women. The mean age was 73±8 years, and all patients had severe mitral regurgitation. PCI was performed for single-vessel coronary artery disease in 40 (43%) patients, two-vessel in 49 (52.7%), and three-vessel in 4 (4.3%). Within a median of 48 days (IQR, 18-71) after PCI, 78 (83.9%) patients underwent primary valve surgery, and 15 (16.1%) underwent re-operative valve surgery, with 56 (60.2%) having MV replacement, and 37 (39.8%) having MV repair. Sixty-five (69.9%) patients were being treated with dual anti-platelet therapy at the time of surgery. The median number of transfused intra-operative red blood cell units was 1 (IQR, 0-2), and the intensive care unit and hospital lengths of stay were 46 hours (IQR, 27-76) and 8 days (IQR, 5-11), respectively. Post-operatively, there was 1 (1.1%) cerebrovascular accident, 2 (2.2%) patients developed acute kidney injury, and 4 (4.3%) required a re-operation for bleeding. Thirty-day mortality occurred in 4 (4.3%) patients. At a mean follow-up of 15.3±13.2 months, 3 (3.4%) patients required target-vessel revascularization. The survival rate was 89% and 85% at 1 and 3 years, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with concomitant coronary artery and MV disease, PCI + MIMVS can be safely performed and is associated with good short-term and follow-up outcomes.

Outcomes of a hybrid approach of percutaneous coronary intervention followed by minimally invasive aortic valve replacement

BACKGROUND

In patients requiring coronary revascularization and aortic valve replacement, a combined approach of percutaneous coronary intervention followed by minimally invasive aortic valve replacement may be a viable treatment strategy.

METHODS

The outcomes of 123 consecutive patients with significant coronary artery and aortic valve disease, who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention followed by elective minimally invasive aortic valve replacement between February 2009 and April 2014, were retrospectively evaluated.

RESULTS

The cohort consisted of 80 males and 43 females, with a mean age of 75.7±8.1 years. Drug-eluting stents were used in 69.9% of the patients, and 64.2% were on dual anti-platelet therapy at the time of aortic valve replacement. Within a median of 39 days (IQR 21-64), 83.7% of the patients underwent primary and 16.3% underwent re-operative minimally invasive aortic valve replacement. Post-operatively, there was 1 (0.8%) cerebrovascular accident, 1 patient (0.8%) required a re-operation due to bleeding, and 2 (1.6%) developed acute kidney injury. Thirty-day mortality occurred in 2 (1.6%) patients. Follow-up was available for all of the patients, and at a mean follow-up period of 14.3±12.5 months, 4 (3.3%) had an acute coronary syndrome, and 1 (0.8%) required a repeat target vessel revascularization. The actuarial survival rate at 1- and 3-year was 92.7% and 89.4%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In a select group of patients with coronary artery and aortic valve disease, a combined approach of percutaneous coronary intervention followed by minimally invasive aortic valve replacement can be safely performed with excellent short-term and midterm outcomes.

Outcomes of a Combined Approach of Percutaneous Coronary Revascularization and Cardiac Valve Surgery

A subset of patients requiring coronary revascularization and valve surgery may benefit from a combined approach of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and valve surgery, as opposed to the standard median sternotomy approach of combined coronary artery bypass and valve surgery. To evaluate its potential benefits and limitations, a literature search was performed using PubMed, EMBASE, Ovid, and the Cochrane library, through March 2016 to identify all studies involving a combined approach of PCI and valve surgery in patients with coronary artery and valvular disease. There were five studies included in the study with a total of 324 patients, of which 75 (23.1%) had a history of previous cardiac surgery. The interval between PCI and surgery ranged from simultaneous intervention to a median of 38 days (interquartile range, 18-65 days). The surgical approach performed consisted of a minimally invasive one or median sternotomy. There were 275 single valve surgery (84.9%) and 49 double-valve surgery (15.1%) with a 30-day mortality ranging from 0% to 5.5%. The 1-year survival ranged from 78% to 96%, and the follow-up period ranged from 1.3 to 5 years. Herein, we present a review of the literature using this technique.

A novel approach to ischemic mitral regurgitation (IMR)

Ischemic mitral regurgitation (IMR) is a complicated medical condition with varying degrees of coronary artery disease and mitral regurgitation (MR). The traditional surgical treatment option for those with indications for intervention is coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) plus or minus mitral valve repair or replacement (MVR). Percutaneous coronary intervention, hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR), and conventional CABG are three techniques available to address coronary artery disease (CAD). Percutaneous edge-to-edge repair, minimally invasive, and traditional sternotomy are accepted approaches for the treatment of MR. When taken in combination, there are nine methods available to revascularize the myocardium and restore competency to the mitral valve. While most of these treatment options have not been studied in detail, they may offer novel solutions to a widely variable and complex IMR patient population. Thus, a comparative analysis including an examination of potential benefits and risks will be helpful and potentially allow for more patient-specific treatment strategies.