Comparison of different percutaneous revascularisation timing strategies in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation

BACKGROUND

The optimal timing to perform percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) in transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) patients remains unknown.

AIMS

We sought to compare different PCI timing strategies in TAVI patients.

METHODS

The REVASC-TAVI registry is an international registry including patients undergoing TAVI with significant, stable coronary artery disease (CAD) at preprocedural workup. In this analysis, patients scheduled to undergo PCI before, after or concomitantly with TAVI were included. The main endpoints were all-cause death and a composite of all-cause death, stroke, myocardial infarction (MI) or rehospitalisation for congestive heart failure (CHF) at 2 years. Outcomes were adjusted using the inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) method.

RESULTS

A total of 1,603 patients were included. PCI was performed before, after or concomitantly with TAVI in 65.6% (n=1,052), 9.8% (n=157) or 24.6% (n=394), respectively. At 2 years, all-cause death was significantly lower in patients undergoing PCI after TAVI as compared with PCI before or concomitantly with TAVI (6.8% vs 20.1% vs 20.6%; p<0.001). Likewise, the composite endpoint was significantly lower in patients undergoing PCI after TAVI as compared with PCI before or concomitantly with TAVI (17.4% vs 30.4% vs 30.0%; p=0.003). Results were confirmed at landmark analyses considering events from 0 to 30 days and from 31 to 720 days.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with severe aortic stenosis and stable coronary artery disease scheduled for TAVI, performance of PCI after TAVI seems to be associated with improved 2-year clinical outcomes compared with other revascularisation timing strategies. These results need to be confirmed in randomised clinical trials.

Management of Myocardial Revascularization in Patients With Stable Coronary Artery Disease Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

BACKGROUND

The best management of stable coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is still unclear due to the marked inconsistency of the available evidence.

METHODS

The REVASC-TAVI registry (Management of Myocardial Revascularization in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation With Coronary Artery Disease) collected data from 30 centers worldwide on patients undergoing TAVI who had significant, stable CAD at preprocedural work-up. For the purposes of this analysis, patients with either complete or incomplete myocardial revascularization were compared in a propensity score matched analysis, to take into account of baseline confounders. The primary and co-primary outcomes were all-cause death and the composite of all-cause death, stroke, myocardial infarction, and rehospitalization for heart failure, respectively, at 2 years.

RESULTS

Among 2407 patients enrolled, 675 pairs of patients achieving complete or incomplete myocardial revascularization were matched. The primary (21.6% versus 18.2%, hazard ratio' 0.88 [95% CI, 0.66-1.18]; P=0.38) and co-primary composite (29.0% versus 27.1%, hazard ratio' 0.97 [95% CI, 0.76-1.24]; P=0.83) outcome did not differ between patients achieving complete or incomplete myocardial revascularization, respectively. These results were consistent across different prespecified subgroups of patients (< or >75 years of age, Society of Thoracic Surgeons score > or <4%, angina at baseline, diabetes, left ventricular ejection fraction > or <40%, New York Heart Association class I/II or III/IV, renal failure, proximal CAD, multivessel CAD, and left main/proximal anterior descending artery CAD; all P values for interaction >0.10).

CONCLUSIONS

The present analysis of the REVASC-TAVI registry showed that, among TAVI patients with significant stable CAD found during the TAVI work-up, completeness of myocardial revascularization achieved either staged or concomitantly with TAVI was similar to a strategy of incomplete revascularization in reducing the risk of all cause death, as well as the risk of death, stroke, myocardial infarction, and rehospitalization for heart failure at 2 years, regardless of the clinical and anatomical situations.

Prognostic value of systemic inflammatory response syndrome after transcatheter aortic valve implantation

AIMS

Systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) could affect mortality after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) up to 12 months of follow-up. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of SIRS after TAVI and its impact on all-cause mortality up to 24 months follow-up.

METHODS

We retrospectively enrolled 132 patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis undergoing TAVI. SIRS development during the first 72 h after the intervention was evaluated. Other postoperative complications were defined according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium 2 (VARC2). All patients underwent follow-up at 30 days and 24 months. Endpoints were 30-days and 24-months mortality.

RESULTS

Post-TAVI SIRS developed in 27 patients (20%). At 30-day follow-up, all-cause death occurred in 10 (8%) patients and SIRS occurred more frequently in patients with adverse short-term outcome (60 vs. 17%; P = 0.001). Twenty-four months all-cause death occurred in 25 (19%) patients. SIRS resulted as an independent predictor of long-term outcome [hazard ratio 3.7; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.5-9; P = 0.004], along with major vascular complications (hazard ratio 4; 95% CI 1.6-9.9; P = 0.003), relevant bleedings (hazard ratio 6.4; 95% CI 1.5-28; P = 0.013) and baseline pulmonary hypertension (hazard ratio 2.4; 95% CI 1.05-5.6; P = 0.039).

CONCLUSION

Postoperative SIRS was more frequent in patients who died at 30 days follow-up. Moreover, SIRS resulted as a predictor of 24-month mortality along with vascular complications, relevant bleedings and baseline pulmonary hypertension.

282 Follow-up of hospitalized COVID-19 survivors: assessment of short- and long-term cardiovascular sequelae after SARS-CoV-2 infection

Aims

Cardiovascular sequelae in COVID-19 survivors remain largely unclear and can potentially go unrecognized. Reports on follow-up focused on cardiovascular evaluation after hospital discharge are currently scarce. Aim of this prospective study was to assess cardiovascular sequelae in previously hospitalized COVID-19 survivors.

Methods and results

The study was conducted at ‘Sapienza’ University of Rome—Policlinico ‘Umberto I’. After 2 months from discharge, n = 230 COVID-19 survivors underwent a follow-up visit at a dedicated ‘post-COVID Outpatient Clinic’. A cardiovascular evaluation including electrocardiogram (ECG), Troponin and echocardiography was performed. Further tests were requested when clinically indicated. Medical history, symptoms, arterial-blood gas, blood tests, chest computed tomography, and treatment of both in-hospital and follow-up evaluation were recorded. A 1-year telephone follow-up was performed. A total of 36 (16%) COVID-19 survivors showed persistence or delayed onset of cardiovascular disease at 2-months follow-up visit. Persistent condition was recorded in 62% of survivors who experienced an in-hospital cardiovascular disease. Delayed cardiovascular involvement included: myocarditis, pericarditis, ventricular disfunction, new onset of systemic hypertension and arrhythmias. At 1-year telephone follow-up, 105 (45%) survivors reported persistent symptoms, with dyspnoea and fatigue being the most frequent. 60% of survivors showed persistent chest CT abnormalities and among those 28% complained of persistent cardiopulmonary symptoms at long term follow-up.

Conclusions

Our preliminary data showed persistent or delayed onset of cardiovascular involvement (16%) at short-term follow-up and persistent symptoms (45%) at long-term follow-up. These findings suggest the need for monitoring COVID-19 survivors.

288 The effects of cardiovascular diseases and treatment on clinical course of hospitalized COVID-19 patients

Aims

Significant concern has been raised about the effect of pre-existing cardiovascular diseases (CVD), cardiovascular (CV) risk factors and CV therapies on COVID-19 course. On the other hand, COVID-19 could worse pre-existing CVD or trigger the development of new-onset CVD. The aim of this study was to evaluate the relationship between pre-existing CVD, CV risk factors, and CV therapy with the clinical course of hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

Methods and results

Consecutive hospitalized COVID-19 patients admitted to the Cardiovascular COVID-19 Unit at Policlinico Umberto I of Rome between December 2020 and April 2021 were enrolled. All patients underwent a cardiovascular evaluation including troponin, electrocardiogram (ECG), and echocardiogram. Data on medical history, pre-existing CVD, CV risk factors, and therapy were collected. Admission to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) or Cardiac Intensive Care Unit (CICU), as well as the development of new-onset CVD, were considered as endpoint of the study. Among n = 229 patients enrolled, 22 (10%) died. Nearly half of patients (112, 49%) were admitted to the ICU/CICU. The presence of prior ischaemic heart disease nearly doubled the probability of hospitalization in the ICU/CICU (HR: 2.09, 95% CI: 1.132–3.866, P 0.018). In regards of therapy, beta blockers reduced the likelihood of admission in the ICU/CICU (HR: −1016, 95% CI: 0.192–10.682, P 0.002). However, neither the use of RAAS blockers, heparin or dexamethasone influenced the risk of ICU/CICU admission (respectively, HR: 0.85, 95% CI: 0.498–1.450, P 0.551; HR: 0.768, 95% CI: 0.435–1.356, P 0.363; HR: 0.861, 95% CI: 0.453–1.635, P 0.647). N = 89 patients (39%) experienced a new onset CVD including arrythmias (18.3%) with nearly half experiencing atrial fibrillation, acute coronary syndrome (10.9%), acute pulmonary embolism (5.3%), heart failure (HF) (3%), and myocarditis and pericarditis (1.3%). A pre-existing diagnosis of HF substantially increased the likelihood of new onset CVD (HR: 2.380, 95% CI: 1.004–5.638, P 0.049). However, treatment with heparin or dexamethasone reduced the risk of new onset CVD (HR: 0.482 95% CI: 0.268–0.867, P 0.015; HR: 0.487, 95% CI: 0.253–0.937, P 0.031, respectively).

Conclusions

Our study found that hospitalized COVID-19 patients who have at least one CV risk factor or pre-existing CVD had a greater likelihood of being admitted to the ICU/CICU and experiencing new onset CVD.

Arrhythmic safety of hydroxychloroquine in COVID-19 patients from different clinical settings

Aims

The aim of the study was to describe ECG modifications and arrhythmic events in COVID-19 patients undergoing hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) therapy in different clinical settings.

Methods and results

COVID-19 patients at seven institutions receiving HCQ therapy from whom a baseline and at least one ECG at 48+ h were available were enrolled in the study. QT/QTc prolongation, QT-associated and QT-independent arrhythmic events, arrhythmic mortality, and overall mortality during HCQ therapy were assessed. A total of 649 COVID-19 patients (61.9 ± 18.7 years, 46.1% males) were enrolled. HCQ therapy was administrated as a home therapy regimen in 126 (19.4%) patients, and as an in-hospital-treatment to 495 (76.3%) hospitalized and 28 (4.3%) intensive care unit (ICU) patients. At 36–72 and at 96+ h after the first HCQ dose, 358 and 404 ECGs were obtained, respectively. A significant QT/QTc interval prolongation was observed (P < 0.001), but the magnitude of the increase was modest [+13 (9–16) ms]. Baseline QT/QTc length and presence of fever (P = 0.001) at admission represented the most important determinants of QT/QTc prolongation. No arrhythmic-related deaths were reported. The overall major ventricular arrhythmia rate was low (1.1%), with all events found not to be related to QT or HCQ therapy at a centralized event evaluation. No differences in QT/QTc prolongation and QT-related arrhythmias were observed across different clinical settings, with non-QT-related arrhythmias being more common in the intensive care setting.

Conclusion

HCQ administration is safe for a short-term treatment for patients with COVID-19 infection regardless of the clinical setting of delivery, causing only modest QTc prolongation and no directly attributable arrhythmic deaths.

Protoplast fusion in microtiter plates for expression cloning in mammalian cells: demonstration of feasibility using membrane-bound alkaline phosphatase as a reporter enzyme

Protoplast fusion is a method for directly transferring cloned DNA from bacteria to mammalian cells at high efficiency. Here, we have used membrane-bound alkaline phosphatase as a reporter enzyme in a miniprotoplast fusion assay. This work demonstrates the principle that large numbers of protoplast fusions can be done simultaneously and successfully, to assay for an activity encoded by an expression vector. The technique described here circumvents key hurdles to expression cloning. This method does not require a highly sensitive assay or a way of separating a rare expressing cell from the mixture of transfected cells containing other transfected genes. With a strong promoter, the protein encoded by the undiluted transfected cDNA should be produced at at least as high a level as it is endogenously produced in the cell from which its activity was first detected. Reference clones are stored, avoiding the need to separate out the cells that are successfully transfected; this also avoids the need to repurify the DNA from the transfected cell. Because of the use of microtiter plates, it is likely that such a method could be partially automated for many types of assays.