Aortic Annular Enlargement in the Elderly: Short and Long-Term Outcomes in the United States

Patient-Prosthesis Mismatch After Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement: Analysis of the PARTNER Trials

BACKGROUND

Our objective was to compare the impact of patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM) for 2 years after surgical aortic valve replacement within the prospective, randomized Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves (PARTNER) trials.

METHODS

Surgical aortic valve replacement patients from the PARTNER 1, 2, and 3 trials were included. PPM was classified as moderate (indexed effective orifice area ≤0.85 cm2/m2) or severe (indexed effective orifice area ≤0.65 cm2/m2). The primary endpoint was the composite of all-cause death and heart failure rehospitalization at 2 years.

RESULTS

By the predicted PPM method (PPMP), 59.1% had no PPM, 38.8% moderate PPM, and 2.1% severe PPM; whereas by the measured PPM method (PPMM), 42.4% had no PPM, 36.0% moderate, and 21.6% severe. Patients with no PPMP (23.6%) had a lower rate of the primary endpoint compared with patients with moderate (28.2%, P = .03) or severe PPMP (38.8%, P = .02). Using the PPMM method, there was no difference between the no (17.7%) and moderate PPMM groups (21.1%) in the primary outcome (P = .16). However, those with no PPMM or moderate PPMM were improved compared with severe PPMM (27.4%, P < .001 and P = .02, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Severe PPM analyzed by PPMP was only 2.1% for surgical aortic valve replacement patients. The PPMM method overestimated the incidence of severe PPM relative to PPMP, but was also associated with worse outcome. There was higher all-cause mortality in patients with severe PPM, thus surgical techniques to minimize PPM remain critical.

Early outcomes of the Y-incision technique to enlarge the aortic annulus 3 to 4 valve sizes

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of a novel aortic annular enlargement technique.

METHODS

From August 2020 to February 2022, 50 consecutive cases of aortic valve replacement with Y-incision aortic annular enlargement and other combined cardiac procedures were performed primarily for severe aortic stenosis. Data were obtained through medical record review, The Society of Thoracic Surgeons database, and National Death Index data.

RESULTS

The median age was 65 (59, 71) years, 70% of patients were female, and 26% had previous cardiac surgery. Sixty-six percent patients had isolated aortic valve replacement. The preoperative mean gradient was 40 (30, 47) mm Hg, and the native aortic annular size was 21 (19, 23) mm. After aortic annular enlargement, the median prosthesis size was 27 (27, 29) with 54% of patients having a size 29 or the largest sized valve. The median increment of annulus enlargement was 3 (3, 4) valve sizes. 88% of patients received no blood transfusion. There were no major postoperative complications, including operative mortality, renal failure requiring permanent dialysis, mediastinitis, or reoperation for bleeding, except for 1 stroke. Three-month postoperative computed tomography aortogram showed the aortic root was enlarged from 27 (24, 30) to 40 (36, 41) mm without aortic pseudoaneurysm. The postoperative mean gradient was 7 (5, 8) mm Hg and valve area was 1.9 (1.7, 2.3) cm2 at 3 to 12 months. Mitral and tricuspid valve functions were significantly improved. Survival was 100% at 18 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Y-incision aortic annular enlargement was safe and effective for upsizing the aortic annulus by 3 to 4 valve sizes.

Prosthesis-Patient Mismatch and Aortic Root Enlargement: Indications, Techniques and Outcomes

Prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) is defined as implanting a prosthetic that is insufficiently sized for the patient receiving it. PPM leads to high residual transvalvular gradients post-aortic valve replacement and consequently results in left ventricular dysfunction, morbidity and mortality in both the short and long term. Younger patients and patients with poor preoperative left ventricular function are more vulnerable to increased mortality secondary to PPM. There is debate over the measurement of valvular effective orifice area (EOA) and variation exists in how manufacturers report the EOA. The most reliable technique is using in vivo echocardiographic measurements to create tables of predicted EOAs for different valve sizes. PPM can be prevented surgically in patients at risk through aortic root enlargement (ARE). Established techniques include the posterior enlargement through Nicks and Manouguian procedures, and aortico-ventriculoplasty with the Konno-Rastan procedure, which allows for a greater enlargement but carries increased surgical risk. A contemporary development is the Yang procedure, which uses a Y-shaped incision created through the non- and left-coronary cusp commissure, undermining the nadirs of the non- and left-coronary cusps. Early results are promising and demonstrate an ability to safely increase the aortic root by up to two to three sizes. Aortic root enlargement thus remains a valuable and safe tool in addressing PPM, and should be considered during surgical planning.

The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Surgery Database: 2022 Update on Outcomes and Research

The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Surgery Database is the most mature and comprehensive cardiac surgery database. It is one of the most respected clinical data registries in health care, providing accurate risk-adjusted benchmarks, a foundation for quality measurement and improvement activities, and the ability to perform novel research. This report encompasses data from the years 2020 and 2021 and is the seventh in a series of reports that provide updated volumes, outcomes, database-related developments, and research summaries using the Adult Cardiac Surgery Database.

Late outcomes of valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation versus re-replacement: Meta-analysis of reconstructed time-to-event data

AIMS

To evaluate all-cause mortality in ViV-TAVI versus redo SAVR in patients with failed bioprostheses.

METHODS

Study-level meta-analysis of reconstructed time-to-event data from Kaplan-Meier curves of non-randomized studies published by September 30, 2021.

RESULTS

Ten studies met our eligibility criteria and included a total of 3345 patients (1676 patients underwent ViV-TAVI and 1669 patients underwent redo SAVR). Pooling all the studies, ViV-TAVI showed a lower risk of all-cause mortality in the first 44 days [hazard ratio (HR) 0.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.49-0.93, P = 0.017], with an HR reversal after 197 days favoring redo SAVR (HR 1.53; 95% CI 1.22-1.93; P < 0.001). Pooling only the matched populations (1143 pairs), ViV-TAVI showed a lower risk of all-cause mortality in the first 55 days [hazard ratio (HR) 0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.45-0.89, P < 0.001], with a reversal HR after 212 days favoring redo SAVR (HR 1.57; 95% CI 1.22-2.03; P < 0.001). The Cox regression model showed a statistically significant association of prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) with all-cause mortality during follow-up for ViV-TAVI (HR 1.03 per percentage increase in the study- and treatment arm-level proportion of PPM, 95% 1.02-1.05, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

ViV-TAVI is associated with a strong protective effect immediately after the procedure in comparison with redo SAVR, however, this initial advantage reverses over time and redo SAVR seems to be a protective factor for all-cause mortality after 6 months. Considering that these results are the fruit of pooling data from observational studies, they should be interpreted with caution and trials are warranted.

Bioprosthetic Aortic Valve Hemodynamics: Definitions, Outcomes, and Evidence Gaps: JACC State-of-the-Art Review

A virtual workshop was organized by the Heart Valve Collaboratory to identify areas of expert consensus, areas of disagreement, and evidence gaps related to bioprosthetic aortic valve hemodynamics. Impaired functional performance of bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement is associated with adverse patient outcomes; however, this assessment is complicated by the lack of standardization for labelling, definitions, and measurement techniques, both after surgical and transcatheter valve replacement. Echocardiography remains the standard assessment methodology because of its ease of performance, widespread availability, ability to do serial measurements over time, and correlation with outcomes. Management of a high gradient after replacement requires integration of the patient's clinical status, physical examination, and multimodality imaging in addition to shared patient decisions regarding treatment options. Future priorities that are underway include efforts to standardize prosthesis sizing and labelling for both surgical and transcatheter valves as well as trials to characterize the consequences of adverse hemodynamics.