Search

Background This single-center retrospective study assessed the variation of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) after transapical transcatheter aortic valve implantation and its effect on survival. We also evaluated the effect of sheath diameter on LVEF. Methods We analyzed data of all consecutive patients who underwent transapical transcatheter aortic valve implantation with the Sapien (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA) device (and its evolutions) between 2009 and 2015. We analyzed the difference between preoperative LVEF and LVEF at discharge (ΔEF = LVEFpost-op – LVEFpre-op) and considered its interquartile range (±5%) as the cutoff. Patients were divided in three groups: (1) improved LVEF (ΔEF ≥ +5%); (2) unchanged LVEF (ΔEF –5% to +5%), and (3) worsened LVEF (ΔEF ≤ –5%). Survival was evaluated with Kaplan-Meier analysis, and logistic regression multivariable analysis was used to determine independent predictors of LVEF improvement. Results Data of 122 patients were analyzed. Patients in the three groups were distributed as follows: (group 1) 27 patients (22.1%), (group 2) 69 (56.6%), and (group 3) 26 (21.3%). The mean ΔEF was 12.7% ± 4.7% in group 1 and –10.8% ± 3.9% in group 3. The ΔEF was more likely to improve in patients with preoperative LVEF of less than 0.35 ( p = 0.014). There were no significant differences in survival ( p = 0.41), rehospitalization ( p = 0.472), and New York Heart Association Functional Classification ( p = 0.307) among the groups. The use of the smallest available sheath (18F) was not associated with a significant change of ΔEF. Conclusions LVEF worsened in a small number of patients after transapical transcatheter aortic valve implantation, but this change was not associated with worse postoperative outcomes. Patients with a low LVEF showed better improvement. The progressive reduction of sheath diameter does not have a significant effect on LVEF changes.

Concerns still exist regarding long-term results and freedom from valve-related adverse events in transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). The aim of this single-center retrospective study was to assess intermediate-term (up to 5-year) clinical and hemodynamic outcomes in patients undergoing TAVI.From 2007 through 2013, 338 consecutive patients underwent TAVI at our institution. Preoperative variables were defined according to the European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation (EuroSCORE) definitions, and outcomes were reported according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC)-2 definitions. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to identify independent predictors of mortality at follow-up.transfemoral (TF) and transapical (TA) TAVI were performed in 233 (69%) and 105 (31%) patients, respectively. All-cause 30-day mortality was 4.4%, with no differences between TA and TF procedures. Thirty-day cardiovascular death, stroke, and myocardial infarction were not different between groups. The acute kidney injury (AKI) rate was higher in the TA group (30.5% versus 11.2%; p0.001). Access-related complications were more frequent in the TF group (36.1% versus 11.4%; p0.001). Mean follow-up was 22.3 ± 17.8 months (range, 1-74 months). Overall survival rates at 1, 3, and 5 years were 85.5% ± 2.1%, 69.9% ± 3.2%, and 61% ± 4.3%, respectively. Independent predictors of all-cause mortality at follow-up were previous myocardial infarction (odds ratio [OR], 2.7), any grade of paravalvular leak (PVL) (OR, 2.5), and AKI (OR, 3.1). Mean gradient and effective orifice area at follow-up were 10.7 ± 12.0 mm Hg and 1.1 ± 0.9 cm(2)/m(2), respectively.Our data show that TAVI has good early and intermediate-term clinical and hemodynamic outcomes in high-risk or inoperable patients with severe symptomatic aortic valve stenosis. PVL of any grade has a significant impact on survival.

Background Severe aortic stenosis with a low transvalvular gradient and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is often misdiagnosed, leading to undertreatment of such patients with no clear indication for surgical intervention. This study investigated the outcome of aortic valve replacement (AVR) in patients with severe aortic stenosis and a low transvalvular gradient despite normal LVEF. Methods Between 1985 and 2008, we evaluated 73 patients who underwent AVR compared with 29 patients who did not. Overall, aortic valve area was 1.0 cm 2 or smaller, LVEF was 0.50 or higher, and transvalvular gradient was 30 mm Hg or less. Multivariate and Cox analyses were used to compare these two groups according to AVR. Results Compared with controls, AVR patients were younger and with higher body mass index. Coronary artery bypass grafting was performed simultaneously in 38 AVR patients (52%). At follow-up (median, 42 months; interquartile range, 23 to 75 months), survival was longer in AVR patients. By Cox analysis, AVR remained a major predictor of lower mortality (hazard ratio, 0.237; 95% confidence interval, 0.119 to 0.470; p Conclusions In patients with severe aortic stenosis and low transvalvular gradient despite a normal LVEF, AVR was associated with significant improvement in long-term survival and functional status and with a low operative mortality.