Predictors of Mid-Term AVNeo Insufficiency

INTRODUCTION

Aortic stenosis (AS) is the most common valvular heart disease and the most common indication for aortic valve replacement in adults. Aortic valve neocuspidization (AVNeo) with fixed autologous pericardium, also known as the Ozaki procedure, is a possible alternative treatment of AS. Autopericardial valves save the dynamics and physiological anatomy of the aortic root, however, the service life of autopericardial leaflets is limited. There is no data about factors that may influence the development of AVNeo insufficiency. Here, we assessed the effect of autopericardial leaflet symmetry on the development of aortic insufficiency after Ozaki procedure.

METHODS

This study included 381 patients with AS who underwent Ozaki procedure. Patients were divided into group 1 (171 patients with symmetric aortic root) and group 2 (210 patients with asymmetric aortic root).

RESULTS

The maximum observation period was up to 65 months. Sixteen cases of aortic insufficiency were detected in group 1, and 33 cases were detected in group 2. Based on the results of Cox regression, the predictors of aortic insufficiency in the late postoperative period are age and asymmetry of neocusps. According to results of Kaplan-Meier analysis, insufficiency of AVNeo in the maximum follow-up period after surgical correction of AS for group 1 patients was significantly lower than for group 2 patients (P=0.006).

CONCLUSION

Asymmetric neocusps increase the risk of aortic insufficiency in the mid-term period after Ozaki procedure. And the older the patients at the time of surgery, the less likely they develop AVNeo insufficiency.

Sex Disparities in Hemodynamics and Outcomes in Patients Who Underwent Contemporary Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

Studies have reported worse outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in women receiving early generation transcatheter heart valves (THVs). They have smaller aortic annuli, which could result in higher gradients and more patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM) after TAVI. We investigated the interactions between contemporary THV hemodynamics and outcomes in women who underwent TAVI. We conducted a retrospective, observational study of patients who underwent contemporary TAVI from 2015 to 2020. We compared baseline characteristics, in-hospital outcomes, and hemodynamics according to sex. We then dichotomized women according to aortic annular area (<430 or ≥430 mm²). Included were 869 patients who underwent TAVI with the SAPIEN 3 or CoreValve Evolut PRO/PRO+. Most patients with small annuli were female (82.5%). They had nonsignificantly higher mortality (30-day: 1.5% vs 0.6%, p = 0.313; 1-year: 4.1% vs 2.7%, p = 0.265). Those who received self-expanding THVs had lower gradients (8.0 mm Hg vs 13.8 mm Hg, p <0.001), resulting in less moderate PPM (21.2% vs 73.6%, p <0.001), similar severe PPM (19.5% vs 15.3%, p = 0.454), and higher rates of pacemaker implantation (14.4% vs 4.2%, p = 0.009). Women with small annuli who received a balloon-expandable THV had nonsignificantly higher mortality (30-day: 2.1% vs 0.8%, p = 0.631; 1-year: 6.3% vs 1.7%, p = 0.118). In conclusion, women who underwent contemporary TAVI had nonsignificantly higher mortality, which could be due to higher PPM rates. These findings were more pronounced in the subset of women with small annuli, in whom those who received self-expanding THVs demonstrated superior hemodynamics at the cost of increased rates of pacemaker implantation.

Mid-term clinical and haemodynamic results after aortic valve replacement with the Trifecta bioprosthesis

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical and haemodynamic results after implantation of the Trifecta bioprosthesis.

METHODS

This study is a retrospective analysis of all patients undergoing Trifecta aortic valve replacement between 01 January 2012 and 31 December 2017 at the Ghent University Hospital. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed to identify predictors of valve- and procedure-related complications and mortality. The haemodynamic performance was analysed by longitudinal Doppler echocardiography.

RESULTS

The mean age of the 182 patients was 77 [standard deviation (SD): 5.5] years; 54.9% were women. The mean follow-up was 39.8 (SD: 24.3) months. Overall survival at 1 and 5 years was 86% (SD: 3%) and 68% (SD: 4%), respectively, and overall freedom from structural valve deterioration was 100% and 98% at 1 and 5 years, respectively. There was no valve thrombosis nor early endocarditis. Urgent surgery was the only risk factor for early mortality in the multivariable analysis [P = 0.009, odds ratio 0.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.01-0.5]. Preoperative atrial fibrillation was the most important predictor of late mortality (P = 0.001, hazard ratio 3.68, 95% CI 1.65-8.21). The average peak gradients were stable from discharge up to 1 and 5 years postoperatively [15 (SD: 6) and 17 (SD: 8) mmHg].

CONCLUSIONS

These results confirm the excellent clinical performance of the Trifecta valve, particularly in an elderly age group. Through the 7-year follow-up period, low transvalvular gradients persisted, and only a few patients needed reoperation. Although structural valve degeneration occurred rarely, it was unrelated to valve size or age at implantation; therefore, further long-term follow-up remains mandatory.

Surgical aortic valve replacement in small aortic annulus

BACKGROUND

Although aortic valve replacement (AVR) has been the standard of treatment for severe aortic stenosis, a small aortic annulus (SAA) poses significant challenges. Improvements in valve designs and evolution in surgical techniques have led to improved outcomes, however, the ideal prosthetic valve remains elusive.

METHODS

We performed a comprehensive literature review to discuss the surgical management of aortic stenosis, with a special focus on patients with SAA.

RESULTS

Stentless valves and root replacement techniques have been shown to overcome the hemodynamic challenges associated with conventional stented bioprostheses, but are technically challenging and require longer cross-clamp times. Sutureless and rapid deployment valves mitigate the long operative time while maintaining the hemodynamic advantages. The use of transcatheter AVR has emerged as another reasonable alternative and has shown promise among patients with SAA, however, long-term outcomes are awaited.

CONCLUSION

There is no consensus regarding the type of valve prosthesis or replacement technique among patients with SAA. Consideration of patient comorbidities and valvular anatomy is paramount in planning the optimal strategy for AVR. Further long-term clinical trials are necessary to assess outcomes and achieve progress toward the development of the ideal prosthesis.

Hemodynamics and reverse remodeling associated with Mosaic, Perimount and Trifecta aortic bioprostheses

Introduction: The implantation rate of aortic bioprostheses is increasing. Their durability has improved to some extent over the years and they allow for future transcatheter valve-in-valve deployment. In the lack of long term follow up, their hemodynamic profile, i.e. transvalvular mean pressure gradient and effective orifice area indexed, and the associated left ventricular reverse remodeling indexed are useful surrogates for clinical outcomes. Areas covered: A systematic review of the literature was conducted by searching Medline, Cochrane, Scielo, Embase databases, and grey literature until July 2018 for articles that perform comparisons among the three most popular aortic bioprostheses. Six randomized and 12 non-randomized studies were included with 565 patients receiving a Mosaic, 1334 a Perimount and 557 a Trifecta valve. These articles are heterogeneous but they allow the meta-analytic comparison of the abovementioned outcomes. Expert opinion: Compared to the Perimount valve, the Mosaic is hemodynamically inferior, while the Trifecta is superior. Despite these statistically significant differences, the left ventricular mass regression indexed, that is indicative of reverse remodeling, was comparable in all groups. All patients were similarly benefited. The predilection among these valves is fueled by their hemodynamic profile but not supported by the comparable reverse remodeling.

Clinical outcome and hemodynamic performance of St. Jude Trifecta aortic prosthesis: short-term follow-up and risk factors analysis

BACKGROUND

We retrospectively analysed the short-term outcome of the third-generation St. Jude Trifecta aortic prosthesis.

METHODS

Between December 2014 and December 2017, 177 patients (mean age 75.1±6.8 years, 95 males, 82 females) underwent aortic valve replacement with a St. Jude Trifecta aortic prosthesis and were followed up to 27±9 months. Preoperatively 92 patients (52.0%) were in NYHA class III-IV, EuroSCORE II was 3.2%±2.1%.

RESULTS

Trifecta sizes implanted were 19 mm (n=46) (26%), 21 mm (n=69) (39%), 23 mm (n=46) (26%), 25 mm (n=16) (9%). Concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting was performed in 60 patients (34.0%). Operative mortality was 3.4% (1.7% for isolated aortic valve replacement versus 6.7% for combined aortic valve replacement and coronary artery bypass grafting) (P=0.084). The only independent predictor of mortality was the need for the mechanical ventilation greater than 24 hours (P=0.037); recently occurring myocardial infarction was risk factor for mortality at the univariate analysis only (P=0.013). Three-year survival was 84%±6%, freedom from cardiac death 98%±1%, freedom from prosthetic endocarditis 97%±1%. No thromboembolisms or structural valve degeneration were observed. Patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM) was absent in 126 patients (71.2%), mild-to-moderate in 32 (18.1%), moderate in 19 (10.7%), severe in no any patient. Follow-up echocardiography showed an average mean and peak trans-aortic valve gradients reduction more than 70% in comparison with preoperative value (P<0.0001), and a significant regression of left ventricular hypertrophy (P<0.0001). Moderate PPM did not negatively affect survival. Concomitant severe coronary artery disease was found as an independent predictor of reduced survival (72%±12% versus 86%±6%) (P=0.015).

CONCLUSIONS

Trifecta aortic prosthesis seems to provide very favourable clinical outcome and hemodynamic performance. At three years, survival was negatively affected by severe coronary artery disease detected at the time of operation. During short-term follow-up, no early structural valve degeneration was been observed. Due to low incidence of PPM and low peak and mean trans-prosthetic aortic valve gradients, third generation Trifecta aortic prosthesis should be considered as one of the best options in the setting of the aortic valve replacement surgery. However, a long-term follow-up is mandatory to confirm the early promising data.

Trifecta has lower gradient and less prosthesis-patient mismatch than Mosaic Ultra in the aortic position: A prospective randomized study

OBJECTIVE

When aortic valve replacement is needed, a biological valve is usually implanted in patients older than age 60 to 65 years. A large valvular opening area is important to avoid prosthesis-patient mismatch and facilitate reverse left ventricular remodeling. The Trifecta biological valve (St Jude Medical, St Paul, Minn) is, because of its design, believed to reduce transvalvular gradient compared with other biological valves, especially in smaller annuli. Several retrospective studies have compared transvalvular gradients of implanted valves prostheses using the respective manufacturers given size and not the actual annulus size measured by a metric sizer. This makes comparison of the hemodynamic properties of different valve brands and sizes difficult. We therefore performed a prospective randomized study, using the same metric sizer to measure annulus size, and compared hemodynamic profiles of the Trifecta to our standard Mosaic Ultra biological valve (Medtronic, Minneapolis, Minn).

METHODS

Ninety elective patients with small to medium annulus diameter undergoing aortic valve replacement were randomized to either Trifecta or Mosaic Ultra. After native valve removal and decalcification, a Hegar-sizer was used to measure true annulus size. Then the largest possible valve of either brand was implanted according to the randomization protocol. Echocardiography was performed 6 months postoperatively.

RESULTS

Baseline parameters of the 2 cohorts were comparable. There were lower transvalvular gradients in the Trifecta compared with the Mosaic Ultra group for the given annulus sizes. Severe prosthesis-patient mismatch was present in 28% of patients in the Mosaic group and 3% of patients in the Trifecta group.

CONCLUSIONS

Trifecta showed lower transvalvular gradients and less severe prosthesis-patient mismatch compared with Mosaic Ultra for the given annulus sizes. ClinicalTrials.gov Protocol ID: 2011/2596/REK.

Outcomes of surgical aortic valve replacement using Carpentier-Edwards PERIMOUNT bioprosthesis series in elderly patients with severe aortic valve stenosis: a retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

We sought to compare the outcomes of Carpentier-Edwards PERIMOUNT (CEP), Magna and Magna Ease valves in Japanese elderly patients with severe aortic valve stenosis (AS).

METHODS

We retrospectively identified 136 patients (mean age 76.61 ± 5.5 years old) who had undergone isolated surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) using CEP, Magna, and Magna Ease valves at a single institution, from January 2001 to December 2013. We compared the valves according to their survival rates, freedom from major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), and durability and hemodynamic performance by echocardiographic data.

RESULTS

The thirty-day mortality after isolated SAVR in all the valve groups was "zero". The differences among the three groups in terms of survival rates, freedom from MACCE at 2 years, durability and hemodynamic performance of the valves by echocardiographic data was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

All CEP, Magna and Magna Ease valves seemed to be similarly useful in Japanese elderly patients with severe AS. Our data did not clearly support the superiority of one valve over another. A longer follow-up period might be necessary to compare the durability and hemodynamic performance of these valves with more certainty.