Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Oncology Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis

Cardiovascular Considerations Before Cancer Therapy: Gaps in Evidence and JACC: CardioOncology Expert Panel Recommendations

Baseline cardiovascular assessment before the initiation of potentially cardiotoxic cancer therapies is a key component of cardio-oncology, aiming to reduce cardiovascular complications and morbidity in patients and survivors. Recent clinical practice guidelines provide both general and cancer therapy-specific recommendations for baseline cardiovascular toxicity risk assessment and management, including the use of dedicated risk scores, cardiovascular imaging, and biomarker testing. However, the value of such interventions in altering disease trajectories has not been established, with many recommendations based on expert opinion or Level of Evidence: C, studies with a potential for high risk of bias. Advances in understanding underlying mechanisms of cardiotoxicity and the increased availability of genetic and immunologic profiling present new opportunities for personalized risk assessment. This paper evaluates the existing evidence on cardiovascular care of cancer patients before cardiotoxic cancer therapy and highlights gaps in evidence and priorities for future research.

Outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement in cancer survivors with prior chest radiation therapy: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

Clinical outcomes for TAVR in cancer survivors with prior chest radiation therapy (C-XRT) who develop symptomatic aortic-valve stenosis are not adequately assessed in major clinical trials leading to conflicting results. Hence, we conducted this meta-analysis to evaluate the, safety, efficacy, and mortality outcomes of cancer survivors with prior C-XRT undergoing TAVR. MEDLINE and Scopus were searched up to March 2024. Observational studies and randomized controlled trials comparing severe aortic stenosis patients with and without prior C-XRT undergoing TAVR with at least one outcome of interest were shortlisted. Data were analyzed using random-effects model to derive weighted mean differences, and risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals. Six studies with 6,191 patients (278 C-XRT and 5,913 no-C-XRT) were included. All-cause mortality at 30-day (RR 1.63, p = 0.12) and 1-year interval (RR 1.59, p = 0.08) showed no significant differences with prior C-XRT versus no-C-XRT. Worsening CHF was the only post-procedural safety outcome significantly higher in patients with prior C-XRT (RR 1.98, p = 0.0004) versus no- C-XRT. The efficacy end-points i.e., improvement in LVEF (MD 1.24; -0.50, 2.98), and aortic valve gradient (MD -0.63; -1.32, 0.05) were not significantly different. TAVR has similar all-cause mortality, efficacy and safety (except CHF worsening) among cancer survivors with and without a prior history of C-XRT.

Racial disparities in TAVR outcomes in patients with cancer

Background

Advances in cancer therapies and improvement in survival of cancer patients have led to a growing number of patients with both cancer and severe aortic stenosis (AS). Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has been shown to be a safe and effective treatment option for this patient population. There are established racial disparities in utilization and outcomes of both cancer treatments and TAVR. However, the effect of race on TAVR outcomes in cancer patients has not been studied.

Objectives

The purpose of this study was to investigate racial disparities in outcomes of TAVR in cancer patients.

Methods

343 patients with cancer who underwent TAVR at a single center over a 6-year period were included in the study. The primary endpoint was a composite of 1-year mortality, stroke, and bleeding. Secondary outcomes included individual components of the primary endpoint as well as 30-day mortality, structural complications, vascular access complications, and conduction system complications. Outcomes were compared between black and white patients by comparing incidence rates.

Results

Baseline characteristics including age, sex, BMI, medical comorbidities, STS score, and echocardiographic parameters were similar between races, aside from significantly higher rates of CKD (50.0% vs. 26.6%, p = 0.005) and ESRD (18.4% vs. 4.9%, p = 0.005) in black compared to white cancer patients. There was a trend toward worse outcomes in black cancer patients with regard to a composite endpoint of 1-year mortality, stroke, and major bleeding (35.7% vs. 22.6%, p = 0.095), primarily driven by higher 1-year mortality (31.0% vs. 17.6%, p = 0.065). 30-day mortality was twice as high in black cancer patients than in white cancer patients (4.8% vs. 2.3%, p = 0.018).

Conclusions

There is a trend toward worse TAVR outcomes in black cancer patients, with higher periprocedural complication rates and mortality, compared to white cancer patients. Further studies are needed to elucidate the structural, socioeconomic, and biological factors that contribute to racial differences in outcomes.

Outcomes of patients with active cancer after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: an updated meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Patients with active cancer and aortic stenosis may be under-referred for valve interventions due to concerns over a prohibitive risk. However, whether active cancer impacts outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) remains unknown.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library in December 2023 for studies comparing the post-TAVR outcomes of patients with versus without active cancer. We pooled odds ratios (OR) and adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) applying a random-effects model. Statistical analyses were performed in R version 4.3.2.

RESULTS

We included nine observational studies analyzing 133,906 patients, of whom 9,792 (7.3%) had active cancer. Compared with patients without cancer, patients with active cancer had higher short- (OR 1.33; 95% CI 1.15-1.55; p < 0.001) and long-term mortality (OR 2.29; 95% CI 1.80-2.91; p < 0.001) rates, not driven by cardiovascular mortality (OR 1.30; 95% CI 0.70-2.40; p = 0.40), and higher major bleeding rates (OR 1.66; 95% CI 1.15-2.42; p = 0.008). The higher mortality rate was sustained in an adjusted analysis (aHR 1.77; 95% CI 1.34-2.35; p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in cardiac, renal, and cerebral complications at a follow-up ranging from 180 days to 10 years.

CONCLUSION

Patients with active cancer undergoing TAVR had higher non-cardiovascular mortality and bleeding rates, with comparable incidences of other complications. This highlights the need for a shared decision and appropriate patient selection considering cancer type, staging, bleeding risk, and optimal timing for intervention.

Impact of cancer in patients with aortic stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Owing to the minimally invasive nature of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), TAVR seems to be preferred in patients with cancer; however, related research on the clinical efficacy and safety of TAVR in patients with cancer and severe aortic stenosis is limited, and conclusions are controversial. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes of patients with cancer who underwent TAVR.

Method and results

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the clinical outcomes in patients with and without cancer who underwent TAVR. We systematically reviewed and analyzed 15 studies (195,658 patients) published in PubMed and Cochrane Library databases between January 2022 and January 2023. The primary outcomes were short-term (in-hospital or 30-day) and long-term (≥12 months) mortality. The prevalence of current or previous cancer in the patients undergoing TAVR was 19.8 % (38,695 patients). Patients with cancer had a lower risk of short-term mortality (odds ratio [OR] 0.69, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.61-0.77, P < 0.001) but a higher risk of long-term mortality (OR 1.54, 95 % CI 1.35-1.76, P < 0.001) than those without cancer. Patients with cancer had a lower incidence of postprocedural stroke and acute kidney injury but a higher incidence of pacemaker implantation than patients without cancer.

Conclusions

Patients with cancer undergoing TAVR have a good short-term prognosis and acceptable perioperative complications compared with patients without cancer. However, the long-term outcomes are contingent on cancer survival.

Defining high bleeding risk in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a VARC-HBR consensus document

The identification and management of patients at high bleeding risk (HBR) undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) are of major importance, but the lack of standardised definitions is challenging for trial design, data interpretation, and clinical decision-making. The Valve Academic Research Consortium for High Bleeding Risk (VARC-HBR) is a collaboration among leading research organisations, regulatory authorities, and physician-scientists from Europe, the USA, and Asia, with a major focus on TAVI-related bleeding. VARC-HBR is an initiative of the CERC (Cardiovascular European Research Center), aiming to develop a consensus definition of TAVI patients at HBR, based on a systematic review of the available evidence, to provide consistency for future clinical trials, clinical decision-making, and regulatory review. This document represents the first pragmatic approach to a consistent definition of HBR evaluating the safety and effectiveness of procedures, devices and drug regimens for patients undergoing TAVI..

Aortic Stenosis Management in Patients With Acute Hip Fracture

The treatment of severe aortic stenosis (SAS) has evolved rapidly with the advent of minimally invasive structural heart interventions. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement has allowed patients to undergo definitive SAS treatment achieving faster recovery rates compared to valve surgery. Not infrequently, patients are admitted/diagnosed with SAS after a fall associated with a hip fracture (HFx). While urgent orthopedic surgery is key to reduce disability and mortality, untreated SAS increases the perioperative risk and precludes physical recovery. There is no consensus on what the best strategy is either hip correction under hemodynamic monitoring followed by valve replacement or preoperative balloon aortic valvuloplasty to allow HFx surgery followed by valve replacement. However, preoperative minimalist transcatheter aortic valve replacement may represent an attractive strategy for selected patients. We provide a management pathway that emphasizes an early multidisciplinary approach to optimize time for hip surgery to improve orthopedic and cardiovascular outcomes in patients presenting with HFx-SAS.

Management of cancer patients at high and very-high risk of cardiotoxicity: Main questions and answers

In recent years, important advances have been made in the field of Cardio-Oncology. The 2022 ESC Guidelines on Cardio-Oncology proposed a baseline cardiovascular risk stratification for cancer patients and preventive strategies in patients at high and very-high risk of cardiotoxicity. Cardiovascular toxic effects of anti-cancer drugs are being extensively studied; surveillance programs have been proposed, based on the baseline cardiovascular risk. On the other hand, there is little data on Cardio-Oncological management of patients at high and very-high cardiovascular risk with previous cardiovascular diseases. For example, little is known about management of cancer patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), patients with a recent myocardial infarction or other cardiovascular diseases; when to resume anti-cancer drugs after a cardiovascular toxic event. Collaboration between Cardiologists and Oncologists and multidisciplinary team evaluations are certainly essential to decide the best therapeutic strategy for cancer patients, to treat cancer while saving the heart. Therefore, in the present review, we attempt to provide a useful guide to clinicians in treating patients with high and very-high risk of cardiotoxicity by enucleating main questions and answering them based on the evidence available as well as expert opinion and our clinical experience.

Midterm outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients with active cancer

OBJECTIVES

The clinical outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in patients with aortic stenosis (AS) and concomitant active cancer remain insufficiently explored. This study aimed to assess the midterm outcomes of TAVR in patients diagnosed with AS and active cancer.

METHODS

Data from the OCEAN-TAVI, a prospective Japanese registry of TAVR procedures, was analysed to compare prognoses and clinical outcomes in patients with and without active cancer at the time of TAVR.

RESULTS

Of the 2336 patients who underwent TAVR from October 2013 to July 2017, 89 patients (3.8%) had active cancer, whereas 2247 did not. Among patients with active cancer, 49 had limited-stage cancer (stage 1 or 2). The prevalent cancers identified before TAVR were colon (21%), prostate (18%), lung (15%), liver (11%) and breast (9%). Although the periprocedural complications and 30-day mortality rates were comparable between the groups, the 3-year survival rate after TAVR was notably lower in patients with active cancer (64.7%) than in those without active cancer (74.7%; p=0.016). Nevertheless, the 3-year survival rate of patients with limited-stage cancer (stage 1 or 2) did not significantly differ from those without cancer (70.6% vs 74.7%, p=0.50).

CONCLUSIONS

The patients with active cancer exhibited significantly reduced midterm survival rates. However, no distinct disparity existed in those with limited-stage cancer (stage 1 or 2). Although TAVR is a viable treatment in patients with AS with active cancer, the type and stage of cancer and prognosis should be carefully weighed in the decision-making process.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With or Without Active Cancer

Background Data on clinical outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in specific cancer types or the presence of metastatic disease remain sparse. This study aimed to investigate the impact of active cancer on short-term mortality, complications, and readmission rates after TAVR across different cancer types. Methods and Results The authors assessed the Nationwide Readmissions Database for TAVR cases from 2012 to 2019. Patients were stratified by specific cancer types. Primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included bleeding requiring blood transfusion and readmissions at 30, 90, and 180 days after TAVR. Overall, 122 573 patients undergoing TAVR were included in the analysis, of whom 8013 (6.5%) had active cancer. After adjusting for potential confounders, the presence of active cancer was not associated with increased in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.06 [95% CI, 0.89-1.27]; P=0.523). However, active cancer was associated with an increased risk of readmission at 30, 90, and 180 days after TAVR and increased risk of bleeding requiring transfusion at 30 days. Active colon and any type of metastatic cancer were individually associated with readmissions at 30, 90, and 180 days after TAVR. At 30 days after TAVR, colon (aOR, 2.51 [95% CI, 1.68-3.76]; P<0.001), prostate (aOR, 1.40 [95% CI, 1.05-1.86]; P=0.021), and any type of metastatic cancer (aOR, 1.65 [95% CI, 1.23-2.22]; P=0.001) were individually associated with an increased risk of bleeding requiring transfusion. Conclusions Patients with active cancer had similar in-hospital mortality after TAVR but higher risk of readmission and bleeding requiring transfusion, the latter depending on certain types of cancer.

Outcomes of patients with active cancer undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement

BACKGROUND

Cardiovascular disease and cancer are the two leading causes of mortality worldwide, and their association presents a therapeutic challenge. Current data regarding the prognosis of active cancer in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement are conflicting.

AIM

To determine the impact and prognosis of active cancer in transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

METHODS

All consecutive patients with severe aortic stenosis treated by transcatheter aortic valve replacement between February 2010 and May 2019 were enrolled in a prospective study. The cohort was divided according to the presence or absence of active cancer at baseline. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality 1 year after the procedure.

RESULTS

A total of 1,125 patients were enrolled: 1,037 (92.2%) without and 88 (7.8%) with active cancer. The most frequent cancers were haematological (36.4%), breast (14.8%) and prostate (14.8%), with 79.5% of patients receiving curative treatment and 17.0% receiving palliative treatment. The 1-year mortality rate was higher in patients with active cancer (27.3% vs. 13.9%; P<0.01), mainly driven by non-cardiovascular causes. An increased cardiovascular mortality rate at 2 years was seen in patients with active cancer (27.5% vs. 15.0%; P=0.03) compared with a similar rate at 1-year follow-up. Active cancer was a strong predictor of 1-year all-cause mortality (hazard ratio 2.46, 95% confidence interval 1.19-4.68; P=0.02). Major/life-threatening bleeding events at 1 year were more frequent in patients with active cancer (P=0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients who undergo transcatheter aortic valve replacement, 1-year all-cause mortality is higher in those with active cancer. We also observed a trend towards increased long-term bleeding events in case of active cancer.

Incidental detection of malignancy during preprocedural workup for transcatheter aortic valve implantation: A longitudinal cohort study

The aim of this retrospective analysis was to investigate the prevalence and prognostic importance of incidental malignancy detected during pre-TAVI computed tomography. Among 579 patients, CT-work-up for TAVI exposed previously undetected malignancy in 4.5% of patients. TAVI patients with a new malignancy had a 2.9-fold increased risk of death at 1 year, and a 16 month shorter mean survival time compared to patients with no malignancy.

Interventional Cardio-Oncology: Unique Challenges and Considerations in a High-Risk Population

OPINION STATEMENT

Patients with cancer are at risk of developing cardiovascular disease (CVD) including atherosclerotic heart disease (AHD), valvular heart disease (VHD), and atrial fibrillation (AF). Advances in percutaneous catheter-based treatments, including percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for AHD, percutaneous valve replacement or repair for VHD, and ablation and left atrial appendage occlusion devices (LAAODs) for AF, have provided patients with CVD significant benefit in the recent decades. However, trials and registries investigating outcomes of these procedures often exclude patients with cancer. As a result, patients with cancer are less likely to undergo these therapies despite their benefits. Despite the inclusion of cancer patients in randomized clinical trial data, studies suggest that cancer patients derive similar benefits of percutaneous therapies for CVD compared with patients without cancer. Therefore, percutaneous interventions for CVD should not be withheld in patients with cancer, as they may still benefit from these procedures.

Trends and Outcomes of TAVI and SAVR in Cancer and Noncancer Patients: A Nationwide Analysis

Background

Patients with severe aortic stenosis and cancer are often denied surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) due to a prohibitive risk of perioperative mortality.

Objectives

The purpose of this study was to determine the safety of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in patients with severe aortic stenosis and cancer.

Methods

The Nationwide Inpatient Sample database (2002-2018) was used to study the outcomes of TAVI vs SAVR in patients with active or prior history of prostate, lung, colorectal, breast, and renal cancer. A propensity score-matched analysis to calculate adjusted odds ratios (aORs) for major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) and its components.

Results

A total of 1,505,995 crude population and a subset of 345,413 noncancer and 33,565 cancer patients were selected on propensity score-matched analysis. The yearly trend showed a steep increase in the utilization of TAVI. Compared with SAVR, TAVI had a lower risk of in-hospital mortality in prostate cancer, while there was no difference among other cancer types. Patients with lung (aOR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.43-0.97) and prostate cancer (aOR: 0.79; 95% CI: 0.66-0.96) had lower, while colorectal cancer (aOR: 1.43; 95% CI: 1.08-1.90) had higher odds of MACE with TAVI. The incidence of major bleeding was lower with TAVI (except for lung cancer), while the risk of stroke was similar (except for colorectal cancer) between TAVI and SAVR.

Conclusions

TAVI in patients with prostate, breast, lung, and renal cancer appears to be a reasonable alternative to SAVR with lower or similar risks of mortality and MACE.

Successful concomitant minimally invasive surgery for aortic valve stenosis and right lung cancer via right mini-thoracotomy : A case report

Background

The case of aortic valve stenosis complicated with lung cancer have compelled cardiovascular surgeons to make challenging. We report the first successful short-term outcomes of one-stage minimally invasive aortic valve replacement and video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery lobectomy through right mini-thoracotomy in a patient with synchronous bicuspid severe aortic valve stenosis which was unsuitable for transcatheter aortic valve implantation and right lung cancer.

Case presentation

A 76-year-old man with severe aortic valve stenosis was diagnosed with lung cancer of the right upper lobe with stage IA2. Considering the potential risk of tumor metastasis, a one-stage surgical therapy for right lung cancer and type 0 bicuspid aortic valve stenosis was required; however, transcatheter aortic valve implantation was unsuitable due to a bicuspid aortic valve with severe calcification. Therefore, concomitant minimally invasive aortic valve replacement and lobectomy via right mini-thoracotomy were performed. The postoperative course was uneventful.

Conclusion

Concomitant aortic valve replacement and right lobectomy via right mini-thoracotomy may reduce surgical invasiveness, leading to early recovery. This surgical strategy is a useful option, particularly for patients with aortic valve stenosis complicated with right lung cancer.

Are cardiovascular comorbidities always associated with a worse prognosis in patients with lung cancer?

Many factors contribute to mortality in lung cancer, including the presence of concomitant cardiovascular disease. In the treatment of early stage of lung cancer, the presence of comorbidities and occurence of cardiotoxicity may be prognostic. The effect of cardiotoxicity of radiotherapy and chemoradiotherapy on overall survival has been documented. Acute arterial and venous thromboembolic events seem to correlate with the degree of the histological malignancy, its clinical advancement, and even with optimal cardiac treatment, they may influence the survival time. In the case of high-grade and advanced lung cancer stage especially in an unresectable stadium, the prognosis depends primarily on the factors related to the histopathological and molecular diagnosis. Electrocardiographic and echocardiographic abnormalities may be prognostic factors, as they seem to correlate with the patient's performance status as well as tumor localization and size.

Characteristics and Outcomes After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Immunocompromised Patients

Immunocompromised (IC) patients are at greater risk of adverse outcomes from cardiac surgery, and less invasive options for treating severe aortic stenosis among IC patients are often sought. However, despite greater preference for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in this population, there are limited data on outcomes in IC patients. Between January 2015 and December 2019, we studied patients with severe aortic stenosis who underwent TAVI. We defined IC status by the presence of active malignancy and receipt of oncologic treatment, post-organ transplantation-associated immunosuppression, human immunodeficiency virus, chronic steroid use (>5 mg/day), or active autoimmune disorder, and compared characteristics and outcomes of IC patients with those of non-IC patients. Of 173 patients who underwent TAVI, 56 (32%) were IC, 30 (54%) had active malignancy and underwent active treatment, 19 (34%) were IC without malignancy, and 7 (13%) were both IC and had active malignancy. IC patients, compared with non-IC patients, had similar baseline demographics, Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk scores (median 4.3% vs 4.4%), and overall complications (29% vs 26%). There were 37 deaths (16 IC and 21 non-IC) over a median follow-up of 17 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 14 to 20 months), and 1-year survival after TAVI was 84.0% for IC patients and 89.0% for non-IC patients (p = 0.51 by log-rank). After adjusting for Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk scores, IC patients had a nonsignificant trend toward greater risk of death compared with non-IC patients (adjusted hazard ratio 1.48, 95% CI 0.77 to 2.84). IC patients had a significantly smaller risk of cardiac-related death (adjusted hazard ratio 0.21, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.98) but a greater risk of noncardiac-related death (adjusted hazard ratio 4.14, 95% CI 1.71 to 10.0) than non-IC patients. In conclusion, IC patients who underwent TAVI have similar complication rates as non-IC patients, with a nonsignificant trend toward greater mortality, specifically related to noncardiac causes.

Prognosis of patients with active cancer undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation: An insight from Japanese multicenter registry

Background

Malignancy is common in older adults undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), and may affect prognosis. The present study aimed to examine whether active cancer affects all-cause mortality rates among patients undergoing TAVI.

Methods

This retrospective study examined data from 1,114 consecutive patients treated between April 2010 and June 2019. Patients with life expectancy of <1 year due to non-cardiac causes were excluded.

Results

Active cancer was defined as cancer under treatment or cured within 1 year, and was recognized in 62 patients (5.6%) with (n = 17) and without (n = 45) metastases. In multivariate analysis, being female (hazard ratio [HR] 0.55, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.39–0.77, p < 0.001), body mass index (BMI) (HR = 0.92 per 1 kg/m² increase, 95% CI 0.87–0.97, p = 0.001), New York Heart Association (NYHA) class III/IV (HR = 1.53, 95% CI 1.06–2.20, p = 0.022), atrial fibrillation (HR = 2.40, 95% CI 1.70–3.38, p < 0.001), albumin levels (HR = 0.41 per 1-g/dl, 95% CI 0.30–0.57, p < 0.001), and cancer metastasis (HR = 5.28, 95% CI 1.86–14.9, p = 0.001) were associated with all-cause mortality after TAVI.

Conclusion

In patients undergoing TAVI, being female, high BMI, NYHA class III/IV, atrial fibrillation, albumin levels, and cancer metastasis were factors associated with mortality. Meanwhile, active cancer without metastasis was not associated with increased mortality rates. These findings would help clinical decision-making by patients and physicians.

Clinical trial registration: UMIN000031133.

Comparing Clinical Outcomes on Oncology Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective

To compare the clinical outcomes of cancer and non-cancer patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI).

Methods

A computer-based search in PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, CBM, CNKI, and Wanfang databases from their date of inception to October 2021, together with reference screening, was performed to identify eligible clinical trials. Two reviewers independently screened the articles, extracted data, and evaluated their quality. Review Manger 5.3 and Stata 12.0 software were used for meta-analysis.

Results

The selected 11 cohort studies contained 182,645 patients, including 36,283 patients with cancer and 146,362 patients without cancer. The results of the meta-analysis showed that the 30-day mortality [OR = 0.68, 95%CI (0.63,0.74), I 2= 0, P < 0.00001] of patients with cancer in the AS group was lower than those in the non-cancer group; 1-year mortality [OR = 1.49, 95%CI(1.19,1.88), I 2= 58%, P = 0.0006] and late mortality [OR = 1.52, 95%CI(1.26,1.84), I 2= 55%, P < 0.0001] of patients with cancer in the AS group was higher than those in the non-cancer group. The results of the meta-analysis showed that the stroke [OR = 0.77, 95%CI (0.72, 0.82), I 2= 0, P < 0.00001] and the acute kidney injury [OR = 0.78, 95%CI (0.68, 0.90), I 2= 77%, P = 0.0005] of patients with cancer in the AS group was lower than those in the non-cancer group. The results of the meta-analysis showed no statistical difference in cardiovascular mortality, bleeding events, myocardial infarction, vascular complication, and device success rate.

Conclusion

It is more effective and safer in patients with cancer with severe AS who were undergoing TAVI. However, compared with patients with no cancer, this is still high in terms of long-term mortality, and further study of the role of TAVI in patients with cancer with AS is necessary.

Systematic Review Registration

Identifier [INPLASY CRD: 202220009].

Mortality after transcatheter aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis among patients with malignancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

With advancements in cancer treatment, the life expectancy of oncology patients has improved. Thus, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) may be considered as a feasible option for oncology patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis (AS). We aim to evaluate the difference in short- and long-term all-cause mortality in cancer and non-cancer patients treated with TAVR for severe AS.

METHODS

Medline, PubMed, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for relevant studies. Patients with cancer who underwent treatment with TAVR for severe AS were included and compared to an identical population without cancer. The primary endpoints were short- and long-term all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

Of 899 studies included, 8 met inclusion criteria. Cancer patients had significantly higher long-term all-cause mortality after TAVR when compared to patients without cancer (risk ratio [RR] 1.43; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.26-1.62; P < 0.01). Four studies evaluated short-term mortality after TAVR and demonstrated no difference in it in patients with and without cancer (RR 0.72; 95% CI 0.47-1.08; P = 0.11).

CONCLUSION

Patients with cancer and severe AS have higher long-term all-cause mortality after TAVR. However, we found no difference in short-term all-cause mortality when comparing patients with and without cancer. The decision to perform TAVR in cancer patients should be individualized based on life expectancy and existing co-morbidities.

Association Between Previous or Active Cancer and Clinical Outcomes in TAVR Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 255,840 Patients

Background: It has been proposed that transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) may be an option for patients with cancer and severe aortic stenosis. We assessed the association between previous or active cancer and clinical outcomes in TAVR patients. Methods: We searched four electronic databases from inception to March 05, 2021. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes were cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, acute kidney injury, pacemaker implantation, major bleeding, and vascular complications. All meta-analyses were performed using a random-effects model. Relative risks (RRs) and adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) with their 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were pooled. Results: Thirteen cohort studies involving 255,840 patients were included. The time period for mortality ranged from inpatient to 10 years. Patients with active cancer had a higher risk of all-cause mortality using both crude (RR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.13-1.88) and adjusted (aHR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.43-2.25) estimates compared to non-cancer group. In contrast, the risk of cardiovascular mortality (RR, 1.26; 95% CI, 0.58-2.73), myocardial infarction (RR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.34-2.57), stroke (RR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.75-1.09), pacemaker implantation (RR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.50-1.53), acute kidney injury (RR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.74-1.04), major bleeding (RR, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.80-1.66), and vascular complications (RR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.79-1.18) was similar between patients with or without cancer. Conclusion: Our review shows that TAVR patients with active cancer had an increased risk of all-cause mortality. No significant association with secondary outcomes was found.

Interventional Strategies in Cancer-induced Cardiovascular Disease

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To highlight the range of illnesses and procedures that the interventional onco-cardiologists face in their daily practice, along with the recent additions to anti-cancer therapies and their related cardiotoxicity.

RECENT FINDINGS

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) are not devoid of cardiotoxicity as thought earlier and lead to an increased incidence of myocarditis. Transcatheter valve replacement has been shown to be a safer alternative to surgical replacement in cancer patients. Interventional onco-cardiology is a novel field that addresses cardiovascular diseases in the setting of cancer. Traditionally excluding cancer patients from clinical trials has led to a dearth of information needed to tackle cardiac conditions like Takotsubo cardiomyopathy, malignant pericardial effusions, and radiation-induced vascular diseases encountered either exclusively or predominantly in this high-risk population. This review discusses the various treatment options available in the interventional armamentarium with a particular focus on ICI-myocarditis and transcatheter aortic valve replacement in cancer patients.

TAVR in Cancer Patients: Comprehensive Review, Meta-Analysis, and Meta-Regression

Objectives: This study sought to systematically analyze the available clinical evidence on TAVR therapy in cancer patients with symptomatic severe AS.

Background: Aortic stenosis is the most common valvular heart disease in the world. TAVR has expanded the treatment options for this lethal disease process. The safety and efficacy of TAVR in cancer patients has not yet been reliably established. We thus conducted the largest known multi-center meta-analysis on TAVR and cancer status.

Methods: We performed a literature search using PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from January 2015 to 2020. Studies that compared the use of TAVR in patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis and cancer against patients without cancer were included. Meta-regression was also conducted to determine if common clinical factors modified the possible association between cancer status and TAVR mortality.

Results: Five studies with 11,129 patients in the cancer group and 41,706 patients in the control group met inclusion criteria. The short-term mortality in the cancer group was 2.4% compared with 3.3% in the control group (odds ratio: 0.72, 95% confidence interval: 0.63–0.82; p < 0.0001). The frequency of stroke was 2.4% compared with 2.7% (odds ratio of 0.87, 95% confidence interval: 0.76–0.99; p < 0.04). The frequency of AKI was 14.2% in cancer patients vs. 16.4% (odds ratio of 0.81, 95% confidence interval: 0.76–0.85; p < 0.04). The rates of bleeding and need for new pacemaker implantation were not significantly different. Meta-regression demonstrated there was no significant association modifying.

Conclusions: On the basis of the results of this meta-analysis TAVR may be a safe and effective therapeutic option for patients with cancer and symptomatic severe aortic stenosis. Larger, longer, and randomized trials are required to adequately test this above hypothesis.

TAVR and cancer: machine learning-augmented propensity score mortality and cost analysis in over 30 million patients

Introduction

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) and cancer are the top mortality causes globally, yet little is known about how the diagnosis of cancer affects treatment options in patients with hemodynamically compromising aortic stenosis (AS). Patients with cancer often are excluded from aortic valve replacement (AVR) trials including trials with transcatheter AVR (TAVR) and surgical AVR (SAVR). This study looks at how cancer may influence treatment options and assesses the outcome of patients with cancer who undergo SAVR or TAVR intervention. Additionally, we sought to quantitate and compare both clinical and cost outcomes for patients with and without cancer.

Methods

This population-based case-control study uses the most recent year available National Inpatient Sample (NIS (2016) from the United States Department of Health and Human Services’ Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). Machine learning augmented propensity score adjusted multivariable regression was conducted based on the likelihood of undergoing TAVR versus medical management (MM) and TAVR versus SAVR with model optimization supported by backward propagation neural network machine learning.

Results

Of the 30,195,722 total hospital admissions, 39,254 (0.13%) TAVRs were performed, with significantly fewer performed in patients with versus without cancer even in those of comparable age and mortality risk (23.82% versus 76.18%, p < 0.001) despite having similar hospital and procedural mortality. Multivariable regression in patients with cancer demonstrated that mortality was similar for TAVR, MM, and SAVR, though LOS and cost was significantly lower for TAVR versus MM and comparable for TAVR versus SAVR. Patients with prostate cancer constituted the largest primary cancer among TAVR patients including those with metastatic disease. There were no significant race or geographic disparities for TAVR mortality.

Discussion

Comparison of aortic valve intervention in patients with and without cancer suggests that interventions are underutilized in the cancer population. This study suggests that patients with cancer including those with metastasis have similar inpatient outcomes to patients without cancer. Further, patients who have symptomatic AS and those with higher risk aortic valve disease should be offered the benefit of intervention. Modern techniques have reduced intervention-related adverse events, provided improved quality of life, and appear to be cost effective; these advantages should not necessarily be denied to patients with co-existing cancer.

Clinical outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation in active cancer patients and cancer survivors

Background

In this study, we aimed to evaluate the clinical characteristics, perioperative, and mid-term outcomes of patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis and active cancer disease and cancer survivors undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

Methods

Between December 2011 and March 2019, a total of 550 patients (248 males, 302 females; mean age: 77.6±7.9 years; range, 46 to 103 years) who underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation for severe symptomatic aortic stenosis in our center were retrospectively analyzed. Baseline demographic characteristics, cancer type, laboratory data, procedural data, and outcome data of the patients were collected. The primary outcome measure was all-cause mortality at 30 days and every six months up to maximally available follow-up. Follow-up was performed at 30 days, six months, and 12 months after the procedure and annually thereafter.

Results

Of the patients, 36 had a cancer diagnosis-active (n=10) or cured (n=26). The most common types of cancer were colorectal (16.6%), prostate (13.8%), leukemia (11.1%), and bladder (11.1%) cancers. Post-procedural complication rates were similar between the two groups. No mortality was observed in the cancer group at one month of follow-up. During follow-up, seven patients died within one year due to non-cardiac reasons. Although mortality at one year was higher in cancer patients, it did not reach statistical significance (23.3% vs. 11.6%, respectively; p=0.061). The estimated cumulative survival rate was 71.0% in the non-cancer group and 58.3% in the cancer group. The multivariate Cox regression analysis revealed that cancer was independently associated with cumulative mortality after adjusting for age, sex, body mass index, and atrial fibrillation (p=0.008).

Conclusion

Our study results show that transcatheter aortic valve implantation is safe and feasible in active cancer patients and cancer survivors with similar short-term and mid-term mortality and procedure-related complication rates, compared to non-cancer patients.

Aortic valve stenosis and cancer: a common and complex association

Introduction. The prevalence of aortic valve stenosis (AS) and malignancy are both high, especially in elderly people and in developed countries. These two conditions frequently coexist and share the same risk factors as atherosclerotic disease.Area covered. The progression of calcified AS may be accelerated by both cardiovascular risk factors and cancer treatments, such as radiotherapy. The standard treatment for symptomatic severe AS is surgical aortic valve replacement; however, in cancer patients, transcatheter implantation may be preferred as they are often at high-risk for cardiac surgery. In patients with AS and cancer, physicians may face difficult treatment decisions.To date, there is limited information on the impact of malignancy on outcomes in patients with severe AS; hence, there is no established treatment policy.Expert Opinion. Treating clinicians must integrate complex information about the severity of valve disease and expected cardiac outcomes with information regarding the cancer prognosis and the need for specific treatment, including surgery. Other comorbidities, age and frailty also contribute to decision-making about whether, when, and how to perform aortic valve replacement.

In-Hospital Outcomes in Patients With a History of Malignancy Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

A history of malignancy is incorporated in the Society of Thoracic Surgeons score to assess presurgical risk in patients undergoing surgical aortic valve replacement, however data on the prognostic importance in those undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) remains limited. We sought to investigate the utilization and in-hospital outcomes of TAVI in patients with a history of malignancy. The National Inpatient Sample Database was queried from 2012 to 2017 to identify patients who underwent TAVI using International Classification of Diseases (ICD) 9 and ICD-10 procedure codes. Between 2012 and 2017, there were 123,070 patients who underwent TAVI, of these 23,670 patients (19.2%) had a previous history of malignancy. The proportion of patients undergoing TAVI with a history of malignancy trended upward between 2012 and 2017. Patients with a history of malignancy were similar in age to those without (81.1 ± 7.9 vs 80.1 ± 6.7 years old, p <0.001), with a higher prevalence of tobacco use and major depressive disorder (p <0.001 for both). Patients with a history of malignancy had higher rates of post-TAVI pacemaker implantation (p <0.001), otherwise periprocedural complication rates were similar to those without. Using a multivariate logistic regression model to adjust for confounding factors, a history of malignancy was predictive of decreased odds of death in patients underwent TAVI (OR: 0.67, 95% CI, 0.60 to 0.76, p <0.001) and higher odds of pacemaker implantation (OR: 1.14, 95% CI, 1.09 to 1.19, p <0.001). In conclusion, with time the proportion of TAVI patients with a history of malignancy trended upward. Despite a greater prevalence of previous tobacco use and major depressive disorder, patients with a history of malignancy had TAVI safely with a low in-hospital all-cause mortality, yet greater cost of hospitalization and more frequent implantation of pacemaker devices.

Pancreaticoduodenectomy after transcatheter aortic valve implantation in an elderly patient with severe aortic stenosis and pancreas cancer: A case report

Introduction and importance

Not only pancreatic cancer but also aortic stenosis (AS) is increasing with the aging population. There is no optimal strategy for elderly patients with both pancreatic cancer and AS. We report a case of pancreatic head cancer with severe AS undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI).

Case presentation

An 88-year-old woman was referred to our hospital because of severe AS with symptoms of heart failure. Preoperative examination revealed resectable pancreatic head cancer, so TAVI was performed before PD to reduce the perioperative risk. The patient underwent PD 34 days after TAVI, with no significant postoperative complications, and was transferred to the other hospital for rehabilitation on postoperative day 45. No recurrence was observed at more than 7 months without adjuvant therapy.

Clinical discussion

Aortic valve replacement (AVR) is recommended before non-cardiac surgery in patients with symptomatic severe AS. Surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) is the standard treatment. However, owing to the highly invasive procedure and increased perioperative risk, SAVR is usually avoided in elderly patients with malignancy and severe AS. We demonstrated that TAVI followed by PD could be safely performed in high-risk elderly patients presenting with both severe AS and pancreatic head cancer. To our knowledge, this is the first case report of PD after TAVI in a patient with severe AS.

Conclusion

We demonstrated that TAVI followed by PD could be safely performed in high-risk elderly patients presenting with severe AS and co-existing malignancy.

•

Severe aortic stenosis (AS) is a risk factor for non-cardiac surgery. In some cases, prior treatment of AS is recommended.

•

Minimally invasive transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) may be a treatment option for the elderly cancer patients.

•

Preceding TAVI may be a useful therapeutic strategy for elderly cancer patients with severe AS.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients with a history of cancer: Periprocedural and long-term outcomes

BACKGROUND

A history of cancer is incorporated into the surgical risk assessment of patients undergoing surgical aortic valve replacement through the Society for Thoracic Surgeons score. However, the prognostic significance of cancer in patients treated with transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is unclear. As the cancer survivorship population increases, it is imperative to establish the efficacy and safety of TAVR in patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis (AS) and a history of malignancy.

OBJECTIVES

The primary goal of this study was to assess the periprocedural outcomes and long-term mortality in patients with a history of cancer undergoing TAVR.

METHODS

A systematic review of PubMed, MEDLINE, and EMBASE was conducted to identify studies reporting outcomes in patients with a history of malignancy undergoing TAVR. A meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model with a primary outcome of all-cause mortality and cardiac mortality at the longest follow-up. On secondary analyses, procedural safety was assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 13 observational studies with 10,916 patients were identified in the systematic review. Seven studies including 6,323 patients were included in the quantitative analysis. Short-term mortality (relative risk [RR] 0.61, 95%CI 0.36-1.01; p = .06) and long-term all-cause mortality (RR 1.24, 95%CI 0.95-1.63; p = .11) were not significantly different when comparing patients with and without a history of cancer. No significant difference in the rate of periprocedural complications including stroke, bleeding, acute kidney injury, and pacemaker implantation was noted.

CONCLUSION

In patients with severe AS undergoing TAVR, a history of cancer was not associated with adverse short or long-term survival. Based on these findings, TAVR should be considered in all patients with severe symptomatic AS, irrespective of their history of malignancy.

Impact of Cancer in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Single-Center Study

Background

The use of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in cancer survivors and patients with active cancer (AC) in cancer survivors and patients with active cancer (AC) is expanding, suggesting a need to adjust the indications and risk assessment pre-TAVR.

Objectives

The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of cancer on peri-procedural complications and survival in a long-term, single-center cohort of patients treated with TAVR.

Methods

Patients treated with TAVR between January 2006 and December 2018 were grouped as follows: controls (patients without cancer), stable cancer (SC), and AC. The primary endpoints were peri-procedural complications and 30-day survival. A secondary endpoint was 10-year survival.

Results

A total of 1,088 patients (age 81 ± 5 years, 46.6% men) treated with transfemoral TAVR were selected: 839 controls, 196 SC, and 53 AC. Predominant malignancies were breast, gastrointestinal, and prostate cancer. No differences were observed between patients with cancer and controls regarding peri-procedural complications. Patients with AC had similar 30-day survival compared with controls and SC (94.3% vs. 93.3% vs. 96.9%, p = 0.161), but as expected, reduced 10-year survival. AC was associated with a 1.47 (95% CI 1.16 to 1.87) fold increased risk of all-cause 10-year mortality in multivariable adjusted models.

Conclusions

TAVR should be performed in patients with cancer when indicated, considering that patients with cancer have similar periprocedural complications and short-term survival compared with control patients. However, patients with AC have worse 10-year survival. Future studies are needed to define cancer-specific determinants of worse long-term survival.

Impact of cancer history on clinical outcome in patients undergoing transcatheter edge-to-edge mitral repair

Background

Little is known about the prevalence of a history of cancer and its impact on clinical outcome in mitral regurgitation (MR) patients undergoing transcatheter mitral valve repair (TMVR).

Objectives

The purpose of this study is to investigate the prevalence of cancer, baseline inflammatory parameters, and clinical outcome in MR patients undergoing TMVR.

Methods

Consecutive patients undergoing a MitraClip procedure were enrolled, and the patients were stratified into two groups: cancer and non-cancer. Baseline complete blood counts (CBC) with differential hemograms were collected prior to the procedure to calculate the platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR). All-cause death within a one-year was examined.

Results

In total, 82 out of 446 patients (18.4%) had a history of cancer. Cancer patients had a significantly higher baseline PLR [181.4 (121.1–263.9) vs. 155.4 (109.4–210.4); P = 0.012] and NLR [5.4 (3.5–8.3) vs. 4.0 (2.9–6.1); P = 0.002] than non-cancer patients. A Kaplan–Meier analysis revealed that cancer patients had a significantly worse prognosis than non-cancer (estimated 1-year mortality, 20.2 vs. 9.2%; log-rank P = 0.009), and multivariable analyses of three models showed that cancer history was an independent factor for 1-year mortality. Patients who died during follow-up had a significantly higher baseline PLR [214.2 (124.2–296.7) vs. 156.3 (110.2–212.1); P = 0.007] and NLR [6.4 (4.2–12.5) vs. 4.0 (2.9–6.2); P < 0.001] than survivors.

Conclusions

In MitraClip patients, a history of cancer was associated with higher inflammatory parameters and worse prognosis compared to non-cancer patients.

Graphical Abstract

Central Illustration. Clinical outcomes and baseline PLR and NLR values accord-ing to one-year mortality. (Left) Patients who died within the follow-up period had a significantly higher baseline PLR (214.2 [124.2–296.7] vs 156.3 [110.2–212.1]; P = 0.007) and NLR (6.4 [4.2–12.5] vs 4.0 [2.9–6.2]; P < 0.001) than patients who survived. PLR, platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio; NLR, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (Right) A Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed that cancer patients had a significantly worse prognosis than non-cancer patients (estimated one-year mortality, 20.2 vs 9.2%; log-rank P = 0.009).

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00392-020-01770-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Outcomes of Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation With Incidentally Discovered Masses on Computed Tomography

Routine preprocedural chest and abdomen computed tomography is done prior to transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), which, in turn, have led to the discovery of radiographic potentially malignant incidental masses (pMIM). It is largely unknown whether pMIM impact the outcomes of patients undergoing TAVI. In this retrospective cohort study from a single center, 1,081 patients underwent TAVI from 2012 to 2016, who had available computed tomographies, survived the index hospitalization, and also had 1 year follow-up data for review. Machine learning (backward propagation neural network)-augmented multivariable regression for mortality by pMIM was conducted. In this cohort of 1,081 patients, the mean age was 79.1 (± 9.0), 48.8% were females, 16.8% had a history of prior malignancy, and 21.1% had pMIM. One-year mortality for the entire cohort was 12.6%. The most common prior malignancies were prostate, breast, and lymphoma and the most common pMIM were present in the lung, kidneys, and thyroid. In a fully adjusted regression analysis, neither prior malignancy nor pMIM increased mortality odds. However, having both was associated with a higher 1-year mortality (odds ratio 4.02, 95% confidence interval 1.50 to 10.73, p = 0.006). In conclusion, presence of pMIM alone was not associated with an increased 1-year mortality among patients undergoing TAVI. However, the presence of pMIM and a history of prior malignancy was associated with a significant increase in 1-year mortality.

Outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement in cancer survivors with prior chest radiation therapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Cancer survivors with prior chest radiation therapy (C-XRT) frequently present with aortic stenosis (AS) as the first manifestation of radiation-induced heart disease. They are considered high-risk for surgical valve replacement. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is as an attractive option for this patient population but the outcomes are not well established in major clinical trials. The authors performed a systemic review and meta-analysis of clinical studies for the outcomes after TAVR in cancer survivors with prior C-XRT.

Methods

Online databases were searched from inception to April 2020 for studies evaluating the outcomes of TAVR in patients with and without C-XRT. We analyzed the pooled estimates (with their 95% confidence intervals) of the odds ratio (OR) for the all-cause mortality at 30-day and 1-year follow-ups, 4-point safety outcomes (stroke, major bleed, access-related vascular complications and need for a pacemaker), a 2-point efficacy outcome (mean aortic valve gradient and left ventricular ejection fraction) and worsening of congestive heart failure (CHF). Four studies were included following 2054 patients with and without prior C-XRT exposure (164 patients and 1890 patients respectively).

Results

The C-XRT group had similar 30-day mortality compared to the control group (OR 1.29, 95% CI 0.64 to 2.58, p = 0.48). The 1-year mortality was higher in the C-XRT group (OR 1.97, CI 1.15 to 3.39, p = 0.01). Apart from higher congestive heart failure (CHF) exacerbation in the C-XRT group (OR 2.03, CI 1.36 to 3.04, p = 0.0006), TAVR resulted in similar safety and efficacy outcomes in both groups.

Conclusion

TAVR in the C-XRT group has similar 30-day mortality, safety, and efficacy outcomes compared to the control group; however, they have higher 1-year mortality and CHF exacerbation. Including an oncologist to the cardiology team who considers cancer stage in the decision-making process and applying additional preoperative scores such as frailty indices may refine the risk assessment for these patients. The quality of analyzed data is modest, warranting randomized trials to assess the true benefits of TAVR in these patients.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients with severe comorbidities: A retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the long-term outcomes of patients with severe comorbidities (sCM) undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).

BACKGROUND

The benefit of TAVR may be limited among patients with sCM due to a lack of mortality- or quality-of-life-benefit.

METHODS

All TAVR patients in the Allina Health System between January 1, 2011 and August 7, 2018 were included (n = 890, 82 ± 8 years, 55% men). sCM included: severe lung disease, severe liver disease, end-stage renal disease, severe, severe dementia, severe dilated cardiomyopathy, and frailty. Outcomes between patients with (n = 215, 24%) and without (n = 675, 76%) sCM were compared.

RESULTS

At baseline, patients with sCM had worse symptoms, higher STS-PROM and a lower Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) score compared to those without. During a median follow-up of 15 months (IQR, 7-29 months), there were 208 (23%) deaths. Patients with sCM had a lower 3-year survival free from all-cause mortality (40% vs. 79%, p < .001), and lower 3-year survival free from the composite endpoint of all-cause mortality, re-hospitalization for heart failure, myocardial infarction or stroke (31% vs. 64%, p < .001) compared to those without sCM. The estimated monthly increase in KCCQ scores following TAVR was 1.5, 95%CI (1.3, 1.7), p < .001 irrespective of sCM grouping. From Cox regression analysis, severe comorbidities, with the exception of liver disease, were associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality and any additional comorbidity was associated with a multiplicative increase in risk of mortality of 2.8 (95%CI 2.3, 3.6), p < .001.

CONCLUSIONS

TAVR patients with sCM have poor 3-year outcomes but may experience improvements in their quality of life.

Early Cardiac Remodeling Promotes Tumor Growth and Metastasis

BACKGROUND

Recent evidence suggests that cancer and cardiovascular diseases are associated. Chemotherapy drugs are known to result in cardiotoxicity, and studies have shown that heart failure and stress correlate with poor cancer prognosis. However, whether cardiac remodeling in the absence of heart failure is sufficient to promote cancer is unknown.

METHODS

To investigate the effect of early cardiac remodeling on tumor growth and metastasis colonization, we used transverse aortic constriction (TAC), a model for pressure overload-induced cardiac hypertrophy, and followed it by cancer cell implantation.

RESULTS

TAC-operated mice developed larger primary tumors with a higher proliferation rate and displayed more metastatic lesions compared with controls. Serum derived from TAC-operated mice potentiated cancer cell proliferation in vitro, suggesting the existence of secreted tumor-promoting factors. Using RNA-sequencing data, we identified elevated mRNA levels of periostin in the hearts of TAC-operated mice. Periostin levels were also found to be high in the serum after TAC. Depletion of periostin from the serum abrogated the proliferation of cancer cells; conversely, the addition of periostin enhanced cancer cell proliferation in vitro. This is the first study to show that early cardiac remodeling nurtures tumor growth and metastasis and therefore promotes cancer progression.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study highlights the importance of early diagnosis and treatment of cardiac remodeling because it may attenuate cancer progression and improve cancer outcome.

Favorable outcome of cancer patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement

AIM

The aim of this study was to assess the outcome of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in patients with cancer.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study from the nationwide FinnValve registry on 2130 consecutive patients who underwent TAVR for severe AS from January 2008 to October 2017.

RESULTS

In this cohort, 417 patients (19.6%) had history of cancer and 113 (5.3%) had an active malignancy at the time of TAVR. Patients with any malignancy had similar late mortality than patients without any malignancy (at 7 years, 65.1% vs. 59.3%, adjusted HR 1.105, 95%CI 0.892-1.369). At 7 years, cancer-related mortality was 22.5% among patients with preoperative cancer, and 11.0% in those without preoperative cancer (p < 0.0001). Among cancer patients, 18 died of the same disease (at 7 years, mortality 12.5%). Active malignancy was not associated with increased risk of all-cause mortality (adjusted HR 1.100, 95%CI 0.757-1.599). However, patients with blood malignancies had a significantly increased risk of mortality (at 4-year, 53.5% vs. 35.4%, adjusted HR 2.029, 95%CI 1.328-3.098).

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis showed that, when properly selected by the heart team and oncologists, most cancer patients undergoing TAVR can achieve a good survival and eventually die of other diseases. Blood malignancies seem to carry a poor prognosis in these patients.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03385915; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03385915.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients with severe aortic stenosis and active cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Patients with severe aortic stenosis and concomitant active cancer (AC) are considered high-risk patients and usually are not allowed to undergo surgical valve replacement. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) may be an attractive option for them; however, little is known about the outcomes of TAVR in this subset of complex patients.

Methods and results

In this meta-analysis, Medline, Cochrane Library and Scopus databases were searched (anytime up to April 2019) for studies evaluating the outcomes of TAVR in patients with or without AC. We assessed pooled estimates (with their 95% CIs) of the risk ratio (RR) for the all-cause mortality at the 30-day and 1-year follow-ups, a 4-point safety outcome (any bleeding, stroke, need for a pacemaker and acute kidney injury) and a 2-point efficacy outcome (device success and residual mean gradient (mean difference)). Three studies (5162 patients) were included. Of those patients, a total of 368 (7.1%) had AC. Apart from a significantly higher need for a postprocedural pacemaker (RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.58, p=0.01), TAVR in patients with AC resulted in similar outcomes for safety and efficacy at the 30-day follow-up compared with those without AC. Patients with AC experienced similar rates of the all-cause mortality at the 30-day follow-up compared with those without (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.59, p=0.76); however, the all-cause mortality was significantly higher in patients with AC at the 1-year follow-up (RR 1.71, 95% CI 1.26 to 2.33, p=0.0006). This mortality difference was independent of cancer stage (advanced or limited) at the 30-day follow-up but not at the 1-year follow-up; only patients with limited cancer stages showed similar all-cause mortality rates compared with those without cancer at the 1-year follow-up (RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.91, p=0.37).

Conclusion

TAVR in patients with AC is associated with similar 30-day and potentially worse 1-year outcomes compared with those in patients without AC. The 1-year all-cause mortality appears to be dependent on the cancer stage. Involving a specialised oncologist who usually considers cancer stage in the decision-making process and applying additional preoperative scores such as frailty indices might refine the risk assessment process among these patients.

PROSPERO registration number

CRD42019120416.

Prognostic impact of cancer history in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation

BACKGROUND

The benefit of TAVI in cancer patients is currently unclear.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study is to investigate prognostic impact of cancer status (active cancer or previous cancer) in severe aortic stenosis (AS) patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI).

METHODS

Consecutive TAVI patients in the Heart Center Bonn were enrolled and we stratified the patients into three groups: current cancer (active cancer), non-current cancer (previous cancer), or no cancer. The primary outcome was all-cause death within a 5-year follow-up. We evaluated mean aortic pressure gradient (mPG) values following TAVI (baseline mPG) and at the final follow-up (follow-up mPG).

RESULTS

In total, 1568 TAVI patients were eligible and 298 patients (19.0%) had active or previous cancer. At the 5-year follow-up, cancer patients had a significantly worse prognosis than non-cancer patients (log rank, P < 0.001). In a multivariable analysis, previous cancer was a significant predictor for 5-year mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 1.56; P < 0.001). Estimated mortality rates at 5-year follow-up rates among active cancer, previous cancer, and non-cancer were 84.0%, 65.8%, and 50.2% (long-rank P < 0.001), respectively. The hazard ratios of active cancer and previous cancer for 5-year mortality were 2.79 (P < 0.001) and 1.38 (P = 0.019) compared to non-cancer patients. We found significantly higher mPG during follow-up than at baseline in cancer patients (follow-up 8.10 vs baseline 7.40 mmHg; Wilcoxon P = 0.012).

CONCLUSIONS

Active, and also previous, cancer status are associated with less beneficial long-term prognosis in TAVI patients.

Cardiac Interventional Procedures in Cardio-Oncology Patients

Comorbidities specific to the cardio-oncology population contribute to the challenges in the interventional management of patients with cancer and cardiovascular disease (CVD). Patients with cancer have generally been excluded from cardiovascular randomized clinical trials. Endovascular procedures may represent a valid option in patients with cancer with a range of CVDs because of their minimally invasive nature. Patients with cancer are less likely to be treated according to societal guidelines because of perceived high risk. This article presents the specific challenges that interventional cardiologists face when caring for patients with cancer and the modern tools to optimize care.

Palliative cardiovascular care: The right patient at the right time

In the increasingly complex world of modern medicine, relationship-centered, team-based care is important in geriatric cardiology. Palliative cardiovascular care plays a central role in defining the scope and timing of medical therapies and in coordinating symptom-targeted care in line with patient wishes, values, and preferences. Palliative care addresses advance care planning, symptom relief and caregiver/family support and seeks to ameliorate all forms of suffering, including physical, psychological, and spiritual. Although palliative care grew out of the hospice movement and has traditionally been associated with care at the end of life, the current model acknowledges that palliative care can be delivered concurrent with invasive, life-prolonging interventions. As the population ages, patients with serious cardiovascular disease increasingly suffer from noncardiac, multimorbid conditions and become eligible for interventions that palliate symptoms but also prolong life. Management of implanted cardiac support devices at the end of life, whether rhythm management devices or mechanical circulatory support devices, can involve a host of complexities in decisions to deactivate, timing of deactivation and even the mechanics of deactivation. Studies on palliative care interventions have demonstrated clear improvements in quality of life and are more mixed on life prolongation and cost savings. There is and will remain a dearth of clinicians with specialist palliative care training. Therefore, cardiovascular clinicians have a role to play in provision of practical, "primary" palliative care.