Search

Background : We aimed to compare the procedural efficacy and long-term clinical results of a totally contrast-free Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (TAVI) procedure (i.e., contrast dye was not used for either the pre-procedural assessment or during the procedure) to those of standard practice in patients with severe renal dysfunction. Methods : All consecutive patients with a glomerular filtration rate (GFR) ≤ 35 mL/min and severe aortic stenosis who were treated with transfemoral TAVI at our Institution were included in the registry. The zero-contrast patients underwent carbon dioxide angiography and a non-contrast CT scan for assessment of vascular access suitability, and aortic annulus sizing was performed by a TEE, and the procedural guidance was fluoroscopic and echocardiographic. Procedural outcomes were evaluated, and clinical long-term follow-up was performed for all included patients. Results : A total of 44 patients (median age, 85 (IQR, 80.75-87.00)) were included in the zero-contrast group (TEE guidance and general anesthesia in 37 (84%) patients), while 63 patients were included in the standard practice arm (82 ± 78 mL of contrast dye used). Procedural success was obtained in 100% of cases. There were no differences in procedural outcomes, including final mean aortic gradients (5.5 (IQR, 5.0-10.0) mmHg in the zero-contrast group vs. 6.0 (IQR, 5.0-10.0) mmHg in the standard practice group) and rate of at least a moderate paravalvular leak (0% vs. 1.6% in the zero-contrast and standard practice groups, respectively; p = 0.31). No differences in AKI during the hospital stay were observed. Over a median follow-up of 3.3 years, there was a significantly lower rate of AKI (1.2% vs. 25.9%, p < 0.001) and rehospitalizations (1.6% vs. 35.5%, p < 0.00) in standard practice group. Conclusions : We showed for the first time the feasibility and efficacy of a totally contrast-free strategy compared to standard practice in TAVI patients with severe renal dysfunction. Besides achieving comparable procedural results, the zero-contrast strategy showed a better long-term clinical outcome in reducing hospital readmissions for kidney function deterioration.

Aims: To describe through emblematic images rare but clinically relevant carotid artery stenting complications that occurred at two high-volume centres for carotid artery stenting (CAS)., Background: CAS is an alternative to carotid endarterectomy (CEA) for the treatment of carotid artery stenosis in patients judged to be at high risk for CEA. CAS complications range between 1 and 9% and are higher in older patients complaining of neurological symptoms at the time of presentation. Besides periprocedural or early-after-procedure stroke, which remains the true Achilles' heel of CAS, other dramatic complications might compromise the clinical outcomes of this procedure., Methods: Five infrequent complications, out of more than 1000 CAS performed in the years 2016-2021, have been described., Results: Among CAS complications, acute carotid stent thrombosis, rescue retrieval of a disconnected distal cerebral embolic protection device, plaque prolapse after carotid stenting, cerebral hyperperfusion syndrome (CHS), and radial artery long sheath entrapment requiring surgical intervention were found to account for 0.3% of the total number of procedures performed by operators with high CAS volume., Conclusions: Unusual CAS complications may infrequently occur, even in hands of expert operators. To know how to deal with such complications might help interventionalists to improve CAS performance.

Background: There are no data comparing sirolimus-coated balloons (SCBs [MagicTouch, Concept Medical]) to paclitaxel-coated balloons (PCBs [SeQuent Please Neo, B. Braun]) for the treatment of de novo small vessel disease (SVD)., Objectives: This study sought to compare quantitative coronary angiographic outcomes at 6 months after treatment of de novo SVD with a PCB or SCB., Methods: This prospective, multicenter, noninferiority trial randomized 121 patients (129 SVD lesions) to treatment with an SCB or PCB, with balloon sizing determined using optical coherence tomography. The primary endpoint was noninferiority for the 6-month angiographic net lumen gain., Results: Angiographic follow-up was completed in 109 (90.1%) patients in the per-protocol analysis. The mean ± SD angiographic net gains were 0.25 ± 0.40 mm with SCBs vs 0.48 ± 0.37 mm with PCBs, resulting in SCBs failing to meet the 0.30 mm criterion for noninferiority (P noninferiority  = 0.173), with an absolute difference of -0.23 mm (95% CI: -0.37 to -0.09) secondary to a smaller late loss (0.00 ± 0.32 mm vs 0.32 ± 0.47 mm; P < 0.001) and more frequent late lumen enlargement (53.7% vs 30.0%; OR: 2.60; 95% CI: 1.22-5.67; P = 0.014) with PCBs. Binary restenosis rates were 32.8% and 12.5% following treatment with SCBs and PCBs, respectively (OR: 3.41; 95% CI: 1.36-9.44; P = 0.012). The mean angiography-derived fractional flow ratio at follow-up was 0.86 ± 0.15 following treatment with SCBs and 0.91 ± 0.09 following PCBs (P = 0.026); a fractional flow ratio ≤0.80 occurred in 13 and 5 vessels after treatment with SCBs and PCBs, respectively., Conclusions: The SCB MagicTouch failed to demonstrate noninferiority for angiographic net lumen gain at 6 months compared to the PCB SeQuent Please Neo., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Dr Serruys has reported consultancy for Merillife, Novartis, SMT (Sahajanand Medical technological), Philips/Volcano, and Xeltis, outside the submitted work. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2023 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The optimal access route in patients with severe peripheral artery disease (PAD) undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) remains undetermined., Objectives: This study sought to compare clinical outcomes with transfemoral access (TFA), transthoracic access (TTA), and nonthoracic transalternative access (TAA) in TAVR patients with severe PAD., Methods: Patients with PAD and hostile femoral access (TFA impossible, or possible only after percutaneous treatment) undergoing TAVR at 28 international centers were included in this registry. The primary endpoint was the propensity-adjusted risk of 30-day major adverse events (MAE) defined as the composite of all-cause mortality, stroke/transient ischemic attack (TIA), or main access site-related Valve Academic Research Consortium 3 major vascular complications. Outcomes were also stratified according to the severity of PAD using a novel risk score (Hostile score)., Results: Among the 1,707 patients included in the registry, 518 (30.3%) underwent TAVR with TFA after percutaneous treatment, 642 (37.6%) with TTA, and 547 (32.0%) with TAA (mostly transaxillary). Compared with TTA, both TFA (adjusted HR: 0.58; 95% CI: 0.45-0.75) and TAA (adjusted HR: 0.60; 95% CI: 0.47-0.78) were associated with lower 30-day rates of MAE, driven by fewer access site-related complications. Composite risks at 1 year were also lower with TFA and TAA compared with TTA. TFA compared with TAA was associated with lower 1-year risk of stroke/TIA (adjusted HR: 0.49; 95% CI: 0.24-0.98), a finding confined to patients with low Hostile scores (P interaction  = 0.049)., Conclusions: Among patients with PAD undergoing TAVR, both TFA and TAA were associated with lower 30-day and 1-year rates of MAE compared with TTA, but 1-year stroke/TIA rates were higher with TAA compared with TFA., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Dr Palmerini has received speaker fees from Edwards Lifesciences and Medtronic. Dr Saia has received consulting and lecture fees from Abbott, Edwards Lifesciences, and Medtronic. Dr Kim has received personal fees from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Merill Life Sciences, and Shockwave Medical. Dr Søndergaard has received consulting fees and/or institutional research grants from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and Sahajanand Medical Technologies. Dr Burzotta has received speaker fees from Abiomed, Abbott, Medtronic, and Terumo. Dr Romagnoli has received speaker fees by Abbott Vascular, Abiomed, and Medtronic. Dr Van Mieghem has received research grant support from Abbott Vascular, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Edwards Lifesciences, Abiomed, PulseCath BV, and Daiichi Sankyo. Dr Pilgrim has received research grants to his institution from Boston Scientific, Biotronik, and Edwards Lifesciences; and honoraria from Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Abbott, and HighLife SAS. Dr Adam has received personal and proctoring fees from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, JenaValve, and Medtronic (during the conduct of the study). Dr Di Mario has received research grants to his institution from Abbott, Amgen, Boston Scientific, Chiesi, Daiichi Sankyo, Edwards Lifesciences, and Volcano Philips. Dr Toggweiler has served as a proctor/consultant for Medtronic, Edwards Lifesciences, Biosensors, Boston Scientific, and Abbott Vascular; has served consultant for Medira, AtHeart Medical, Veosource, Shockwave, Teleflex, and Polares Medical; has received institutional research grants from Biosensors, Boston Scientific, and Fumedica; and holds equity in Hi-D Imaging. Dr Testa has received consulting fees from and served as a proctor Abbott, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and Merrill. Dr Berti has served as a proctor for Edwards Lifesciences, Abbott, and Boston Scientific. Dr Ancona has received consultant fees from Abbott. Dr Montorfano has received proctor fees from Abbott, Edwards Lifesciences, and Boston Scientific. Dr Castriota has received proctoring fees from Abbott and Medtronic. Dr Petronio has received consultant and research funds from Medtronic, Boston Scientific, and Abbott. Dr Barbanti has served as a consultant for Medtronic, Edwards Lifesciences, and Boston Scientific. Dr Tamburino has received speaker honoraria from Abbott and Medtronic. Dr Nickenig has received lecture or advisory board honoraria from Abbott, Amarin, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Berlin Chemie, Biosensus, Biotronik, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, CardioValve, Daiichi Sankyo, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Novartis, Pfizer, and Sanofi; owns stock options with Beren, Cardiovalve; has served in clinical trials with Abbott, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Berlin Chemie, Biosensus, Biotronik, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, CardioValve, Daiichi Sankyo, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Novartis, Pfizer, and Sanofi; and has received research funding from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, the Bundeministerium für Bildung und Forschun, the European Union, Abbott, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Novartis, and Pfizer. Dr Stefanini has received speaker fees from Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, and Pfizer/Bristol Myers Squibb; research grants to his institution from Boston Scientific. Dr Latib has served as a consultant for Abbott, Medtronic, Edwards Lifesciences, Boston Scientific, Neovasc, Shifamed, and Philips. Dr Porto has received consulting or speaker fees from Biotronik, Abiomed, Medtronic, Terumo, Philips, Sanofi, Amgen, Daiichi Sankyo, AstraZeneca, and Bayer, not related to this work. Dr Grube has served on the Speakers Bureau/Scientific Advisory Board for Medtronic, Boston Scientific, JenaValve, and High Life; and owns equity interest in Millipede, Pi-Cardia, Ancora, Laminar, ReNiva Medical, and Shockwave. Dr Stone has received speaker honoraria from Medtronic, Pulnovo, and Infraredx; has served as a consultant for Valfix, TherOx, Robocath, HeartFlow, Ablative Solutions, Vectorious, Miracor, Neovasc, Abiomed, Ancora, Elucid Bio, Occlutech, CorFlow, Apollo Therapeutics, Impulse Dynamics, Cardiomech, Gore, Amgen, and Adona Medical; owns equity/options in Ancora, Cagent, Applied Therapeutics, the Biostar family of funds, SpectraWave, Orchestra Biomed, Aria, Cardiac Success, Valfix, and Xenter; has a daughter who is an employee at Medtronic; and his employer (Mount Sinai Hospital) has received research support from Abbott, Abiomed, Bioventrix, Cardiovascular Systems, Philips, Biosense Webster, Shockwave, Vascular Dynamics, and V-wave. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2023 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report of simultaneous grasping of the 3 leaflets during TriClip (Abbott Cardiovascular) implantation. The final valve configuration with a triple orifice resembled the result of the clover surgical technique. This technique should be considered in selected cases of challenging grasping.

Clinically significant tricuspid regurgitation (TR) is common and associated with excess mortality. At the same time right ventricular (RV) failure is a complex clinical syndrome that results from many causes, but is often associated with long-term prognosis. Whilst results of isolated tricuspid valve (TV) surgery are often unsatisfactory and limited by the prohibitive risk of most patients, the recent development of percutaneous recovery techniques has opened new scenarios. In consideration of the complexity of the mechanisms that lead to right heart failure and RV dysfunction it is important to understand the real advantages that percutaneous TV treatment can offer, more specifically the effect of TR reduction on RV remodeling in the setting of functional tricuspid regurgitation (fTR)., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Albertini, Nerla, Castriota and Squeri.)

Background: As transcatheter aortic valve (TAV) replacement is increasingly used in patients with longer life expectancy, a sizable proportion will require redo TAV replacement (TAVR). The unique configuration of balloon-expandable TAV (bTAV) vs a self-expanding TAV (sTAV) potentially affects TAV-in-TAV outcome., Objectives: The purpose of this study was to better inform prosthesis selection, TAV-in-TAV outcomes were assessed according to the type of initial and subsequent TAV., Methods: Patients from the Redo-TAVR registry were analyzed using propensity weighting according to their initial valve type (bTAV [n = 115] vs sTAV [n = 106]) and subsequent valve type (bTAV [n = 130] vs sTAV [n = 91])., Results: Patients with failed bTAVs presented later (vs sTAV) (4.9 ± 2.1 years vs 3.7 ± 2.3 years; P < 0.001), with smaller effective orifice area (1.0 ± 0.7 cm 2 vs 1.3 ± 0.8 cm 2 ; P = 0.018) and less frequent dominant regurgitation (16.2% vs 47.3%; P < 0.001). Mortality at 30 days was 2.3% (TAV-in-bTAV) vs 0% (TAV-in-sTAV) (P = 0.499) and 1.7% (bTAV-in-TAV) vs 1.0% (sTAV-in-TAV) (P = 0.612); procedural safety was 72.6% (TAV-in-bTAV) vs 71.2% (TAV-in-sTAV) (P = 0.817) and 73.2% (bTAV-in-TAV) vs 76.5% (sTAV-in-TAV) (P = 0.590). Device success was similar according to initial valve type but higher with subsequent sTAV vs bTAV (77.2% vs 64.3%; P = 0.045), primarily because of lower residual gradients (10.3 mm Hg [8.9-11.7 mm Hg] vs 15.2 mm Hg [13.2-17.1 mm Hg]; P < 0.001). Residual regurgitation (moderate or greater) was similar after bTAV-in-TAV and sTAV-in-TAV (5.7%) and nominally higher after TAV-in-bTAV (9.1%) vs TAV-in-sTAV (4.4%) (P = 0.176)., Conclusions: In selected patients, no association was observed between TAV type and redo TAVR safety or mortality, yet subsequent sTAV was associated with higher device success because of lower redo gradients. These findings are preliminary, and more data are needed to guide valve choice for redo TAVR., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Dr Webb is a consultant to and has received research funding from Edwards Lifesciences, Abbott Vascular, and Boston Scientific. Dr Kim is a proctor for and has received speaker fees from Boston Scientific, Abbott, Edwards Lifesciences, and Medtronic. Dr Abdel-Wahab has received speaker honoraria and/or consultancy fees to the hospital on his behalf from Boston Scientific and Medtronic. Dr Barbanti is a consultant for Edwards Lifesciences; and is an advisory board member for Biotronik. Dr Søndergaard has received consulting fees and institutional research grants from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, and Symetis. Dr Redwood is a proctor for and has received lecture fees from Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Hamm is an advisory board member for Medtronic. Dr Sinning has received speaker honoraria and research grants from Medtronic, Boston Scientific, and Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Sathananthan is a consultant to Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Schofer has received speaker fees and travel compensation from Boston Scientific; and has received travel compensation from Edwards Lifesciences and Abbott/St. Jude Medical. Dr Andreas is a proctor, consultant, and speaker for Edwards Lifesciences, Abbott, and Medtronic; and has received institutional grants from Edwards Lifesciences, Abbott, Medtronic, and LSI. Dr Guerrero has received research grant support from Abbott Vascular and Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Castriota is a proctor for Medtronic and Boston Scientific. Dr Nazif is a consultant for or has received honoraria from Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Biotrace, and Baylis Medical; and is a consultant for and holds equity in Venus Medtech. Dr Pilgrim has received research grants from Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, and Biotronik; and has received speaker fees from Boston Scientific and Biotronik. Dr Babaliaros is a consultant to Edwards Lifesciences; and holds equity in Transmural Systems. Dr Van Mieghem has received institutional research grants and consulting fees from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Daiichi Sankyo, and PulseCath; and has received institutional research grant support from Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Latib has received institutional research and grant support from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and Edwards Lifesciences; and has received personal consulting honoraria from Abbott, Edwards Lifesciences, and Medtronic. Dr Hildick-Smith is a proctor and adviser for Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and Edwards Lifesciences. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: The first-generation ACURATE neo transcatheter heart valve (THV) (Boston Scientific) was associated with a non-negligible occurrence of moderate or greater paravalvular aortic regurgitation (AR) following transcatheter aortic valve replacement. To overcome this issue, the ACURATE neo2 iteration, which incorporates a taller outer skirt aimed at reducing the occurrence of paravalvular AR, has recently been developed., Objectives: The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of the ACURATE neo2 (Boston Scientific) THV in patients with severe aortic valve stenosis., Methods: ITAL-neo was an observational, retrospective, multicenter registry enrolling consecutive patients with severe aortic valve stenosis, treated with first- and second-generation ACURATE neo THVs, via transfemoral and trans-subclavian access, in 13 Italian centers. One-to-one propensity score matching was applied to account for baseline characteristics unbalance. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of moderate or greater paravalvular AR on predischarge echocardiographic assessment. Secondary endpoints included postprocedural technical success and 90-day device success and safety., Results: Among 900 patients included in the registry, 220 received the ACURATE neo2 THV, whereas 680 were treated with the first-generation device. A total of 410 patients were compared after 1:1 propensity score matching. The ACURATE neo2 THV was associated with a 3-fold lower frequency of postprocedural moderate or greater paravalvular AR (11.2% vs 3.5%; P < 0.001). No other hemodynamic differences were observed. Postprocedural technical success was similar between the 2 cohorts. Fewer adverse events were observed in patients treated with the ACURATE neo2 at 90 days., Conclusions: Transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement using the ACURATE neo2 was associated with a significant lower frequency of moderate or greater paravalvular AR compared with the earlier generation ACURATE neo device, with encouraging short-term safety and efficacy., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures The authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2022 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Vascular complications (VC) are the most frequent drawback of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), affecting up to 20% of overall procedures. Data on the treatment and their long-term impact are scarce. The goal of this study was to report on the incidence, management and impact on the long-term outcomes of VC following TAVI., Methods: This was a multicentric retrospective analysis of consecutive patients undergoing TAVI. The primary endpoint was freedom from major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events at long-term follow-up. Adverse events were evaluated according to Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 criteria., Results: A total of 2145 patients were included: VC occurred in 188 (8.8%); of which 180 were limited to the access site. Two-thirds of the VC were minor; 8% required surgical treatment; the remaining were repaired percutaneously. The major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events-free survival at 2 years was 83.0% for patients with VC and 86.7% for those without (P = 0.143), but 71.9% for patients with major compared to 89.0% in those with minor VC (P = 0.022). Major VC and diabetes mellitus independently predicted worse outcomes at 2 years. The major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events-free survival rate and the occurrence of vascular adverse events in the long term among patients with VC at the access site treated by endovascular techniques (covered stent implantation or angioplasty) were similar to those without VC (84.2% vs 86.7%; P = 0.635)., Conclusions: Major but not minor VC impact long-term survival after TAVI. Covered stents implanted to manage VC at the access site have no impact on the long-term clinical outcome of TAVI., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. All rights reserved.)

Background: Permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) remains one of the main drawbacks of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), but scarce data exist on PPI after valve-in-valve (ViV) TAVR, particularly with the use of newer-generation transcatheter heart valves (THVs)., Objectives: The goal of this study was to determine the incidence, factors associated with, and clinical impact of PPI in a large series of ViV-TAVR procedures., Methods: Data were obtained from the multicenter VIVID Registry and included the main baseline and procedural characteristics, in-hospital and late (median follow-up: 13 months [interquartile range: 3 to 41 months]) outcomes analyzed according to the need of periprocedural PPI. All THVs except CoreValve, Cribier-Edwards, Sapien, and Sapien XT were considered to be new-generation THVs., Results: A total of 1,987 patients without prior PPI undergoing ViV-TAVR from 2007 to 2020 were included. Of these, 128 patients (6.4%) had PPI after TAVR, with a significant decrease in the incidence of PPI with the use of new-generation THVs (4.7% vs. 7.4%; p = 0.017), mainly related to a reduced PPI rate with the Evolut R/Pro versus CoreValve (3.7% vs. 9.0%; p = 0.002). There were no significant differences in PPI rates between newer-generation balloon- and self-expanding THVs (6.1% vs. 3.9%; p = 0.18). In the multivariable analysis, older age (odds ratio [OR]: 1.05 for each increase of 1 year; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.02 to 1.07; p = 0.001), larger THV size (OR: 1.10; 95% CI: 1.01 to 1.20; p = 0.02), and previous right bundle branch block (OR: 2.04; 95% CI: 1.00 to 4.17; p = 0.05) were associated with an increased risk of PPI. There were no differences in 30-day mortality between the PPI (4.7%) and no-PPI (2.7%) groups (p = 0.19), but PPI patients exhibited a trend toward higher mortality risk at follow-up (hazard ratio: 1.39; 95% CI: 1.02 to 1.91; p = 0.04; p = 0.08 after adjusting for age differences between groups)., Conclusions: In a contemporary large series of ViV-TAVR patients, the rate of periprocedural PPI was relatively low, and its incidence decreased with the use of new-generation THV systems. PPI following ViV-TAVR was associated with a trend toward increased mortality at follow-up., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Dr. Alperi was supported by a grant from the Fundación Alfonso Martin Escudero (Madrid, Spain). Dr. Rodés-Cabau holds the Research Chair “Fondation Famille Jacques Larivière” for the Development of Structural Heart Disease Interventions, and has received institutional research grants from Edwards Lifesciences and Medtronic. Dr. Montorfano is a proctor for Edwards Lifesciences, Abbott, and Boston Scientific. Dr. Adam has received personal fees from Edwards Lifesciences and Boston Scientific; and has received grants and personal fees from Medtronic during the conduct of the study. Dr. Noble has received institutional research grants from Abbott Vascular, Edwards Lifesciences, and Medtronic; and is a proctor for Medtronic. Dr. Erlebach has received fees from Medtronic. Dr. Kempfert has received fees from Medtronic, Edwards Lifesciences, and Abbott. Dr. Pilgrim has received institutional research grants from Biotronik, Boston Scientific, and Edwards Lifesciences; has received speaker fees from Biotronik and Boston Scientific; has received consultancy fees from HighLife SAS (CEC); and has performed proctoring for Medtronic and Boston Scientific. Dr. Kim has received personal fees from, performed proctoring for, and has served on advisory boards for Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, Meril, Medtronic, and Shockwave Med. Dr. Hildick-Smith has served as a proctor and advisor for Edwards Lifesciences, Boston Scientific, and Medtronic. Dr. Dvir has provided consulting for Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, and Abbott. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2021 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background Recurrence of mitral regurgitation (MR) after surgical mitral valve repair (SMVR) varies and may require reoperation. Redo mitral valve surgery can be technically challenging and is associated with increased risk of mortality and morbidity. We aimed to assess the feasibility and safety of MitraClip as a treatment strategy after failed SMVR and identify procedure modifications to overcome technical challenges. Methods and Results This international multicenter observational retrospective study collected information for all patients from 16 high-volume hospitals who were treated with MitraClip after failed SMVR from October 29, 2009, until August 1, 2017. Data were anonymously collected. Technical and device success were recorded per modified Mitral Valve Academic Research Consortium criteria. Overall, 104 consecutive patients were included. Median Society of Thoracic Surgeons score was 4.5% and median age was 73 years. At baseline, the majority of patients (82%) were in New York Heart Association class ≥III and MR was moderate or higher in 86% of patients. The cause of MR pre-SMVR was degenerative in 50%, functional in 35%, mixed in 8%, and missing/unknown in 8% of patients. The median time between SMVR and MitraClip was 5.3 (1.9-9.7) years. Technical and device success were 90% and 89%, respectively. Additional/modified imaging was applied in 21% of cases. An MR reduction of ≥1 grade was achieved in 94% of patients and residual MR was moderate or less in 90% of patients. In-hospital all-cause mortality was 2%, and 86% of patients were in New York Heart Association class ≤II. Conclusions MitraClip is a safe and less invasive treatment option for patients with recurrent MR after failed SMVR. Additional/modified imaging may help overcome technical challenges during leaflet grasping.

Background: Surgical aortic valve replacement and transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are now both used to treat aortic stenosis in patients in whom life expectancy may exceed valve durability. The choice of initial bioprosthesis should therefore consider the relative safety and efficacy of potential subsequent interventions., Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare TAVR in failed transcatheter aortic valves (TAVs) versus surgical aortic valves (SAVs)., Methods: Data were collected on 434 TAV-in-TAV and 624 TAV-in-SAV consecutive procedures performed at centers participating in the Redo-TAVR international registry. Propensity score matching was applied, and 330 matched (165:165) patients were analyzed. Principal endpoints were procedural success, procedural safety, and mortality at 30 days and 1 year., Results: For TAV-in-TAV versus TAV-in-SAV, procedural success was observed in 120 (72.7%) versus 103 (62.4%) patients (p = 0.045), driven by a numerically lower frequency of residual high valve gradient (p = 0.095), ectopic valve deployment (p = 0.081), coronary obstruction (p = 0.091), and conversion to open heart surgery (p = 0.082). Procedural safety was achieved in 116 (70.3%) versus 119 (72.1%) patients (p = 0.715). Mortality at 30 days was 5 (3%) after TAV-in-TAV and 7 (4.4%) after TAV-in-SAV (p = 0.570). At 1 year, mortality was 12 (11.9%) and 10 (10.2%), respectively (p = 0.633). Aortic valve area was larger (1.55 ± 0.5 cm 2 vs. 1.37 ± 0.5 cm 2 ; p = 0.040), and the mean residual gradient was lower (12.6 ± 5.2 mm Hg vs. 14.9 ± 5.2 mm Hg; p = 0.011) after TAV-in-TAV. The rate of moderate or greater residual aortic regurgitation was similar, but mild aortic regurgitation was more frequent after TAV-in-TAV (p = 0.003)., Conclusions: In propensity score-matched cohorts of TAV-in-TAV versus TAV-in-SAV patients, TAV-in-TAV was associated with higher procedural success and similar procedural safety or mortality., Competing Interests: Author Disclosures Dr. Webb is a consultant to and has received research funding from Edwards Lifesciences, Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, and ViVitro Labs. Dr. Kim has received proctor or speaker fees from Boston Scientific, Abbott, Edwards Lifesciences, and Medtronic. Dr. Barbanti is a consultant for Edwards; and is an Advisory Board member for Biotronik. Dr. Sondergaard has received consultant fees and institutional research grants from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, and Symetis. Dr. Redwood is a proctor for and has received lecture fees from Edwards. Dr. Hamm is an Advisory Board member for Medtronic. Dr. Sinning has received speaker honoraria and research grants from Medtronic, Boston Scientific, and Edwards Lifesciences. Dr. Wood is a consultant to and has received research funding from Edwards Lifesciences, Abbott Vascular, and Boston Scientific. Dr. Sathananthan is a consultant to Edwards Lifesciences. Dr. Schofer has received speaker fees and travel compensation from Boston Scientific; and has received travel compensation from Edwards Lifesciences and Abbott/St. Jude Medical. Dr. Leipsic is a consultant to Circle CVI and Edwards Lifesciences; and provides institutional core laboratory services to Edwards Lifesciences, Abbott, Medtronic, and Neovasc. Dr. Andreas is a proctor for Edwards and Abbott; and is an Advisory Board member for Medtronic. Dr. Guerrero has received research grant support from Abbott Vascular and Edwards Lifesciences. Dr. Castriota is a proctor for Medtronic and Boston Scientific. Dr. Kodali has received research grants from Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, and Boston Scientific; has received grants and personal fees from Abbott Vascular and JenaValve; has received personal fees from Meril Lifesciences; has received personal fees from and holds equity in Admedus; and holds equity in Supira, Microinterventional Devices, Dura Biotech, and Thubrikar Aortic Valve. Dr. Conradi is a consultant to Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Abbott, Neovasc, and JenaValve. Dr. Nazif has received consulting fees or honoraria from Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Biotrace, and Baylis Medical; and has received consulting fees from and holds equity in Venus Medtech. Dr. Pilgrim has received research grants from Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, and Biotronik; and has received speaker fees from Boston Scientific and Biotronik. Dr. Babaliaros is a consultant to Edwards Lifesciences; and holds equity in Transmural Systems. Dr. Van Mieghem has received institutional research grants and consulting fees from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Daiichi-Sankyo, and PulseCath; and has received institutional research grant support from Edwards Lifesciences. Dr. Latib has received institutional research or grant support from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and Edwards Lifesciences; and has received personal consulting honoraria from Abbott, Edwards Lifesciences, and Medtronic. Dr. Hildick-Smith is a proctor and adviser to Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and Edwards Lifesciences. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2021 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: This study sought to evaluate 1-year safety and efficacy of dual-layered mesh-covered carotid stent systems (DLS) for carotid artery stenting (CAS)., Background: Small clinical studies evaluating 1-year outcomes of CAS performed with 2 available DLS, Roadsaver (RS) (Terumo Corp., Tokyo, Japan) and CGuard (CG) (InspireMD, Boston, Massachusetts), have been published., Methods: The authors performed an individual patient-level meta-analysis including studies enrolling more than 100 CAS with DLS. The primary endpoint was the death and stroke rate; secondary endpoints were restenosis and in-stent thrombosis rates at 1 year., Results: Patients were divided into 2 groups according to DLS (RS n = 250; CG n = 306). At 1 year, 11 patients died (1.97%), 7 patients in the group RS (2.8%) and 4 patients in the CG one (1.31%); and 10 strokes occurred, 4 in the group RS (1.6%) and 6 in the CG one (1.96%). Overall death and stroke rate was 3.77% (n = 21), 11 events in the group RS group (4.4%) and 10 in the CG group (3.27%). Symptomatic status was the only predictor of death and or stroke. At 1 year, restenosis occurred in 12 patients (2.1%), 10 in the group RS (4%) and 2 in the CG one (0.65%) (p = 0.007). In-stent thrombosis occurred in 1 patient (0.18%) in the CG group (0.32%). RS use was the only independent predictor of restenosis., Conclusions: This study suggests that DLS use for CAS is associated with a low 1-year death and stroke rate, and the specific DLS stent used could affect the restenosis rate., (Copyright © 2020 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) use is increasing in patients with longer life expectancy, yet robust data on the durability of transcatheter heart valves (THVs) are limited. Redo-TAVR may play a key strategy in treating patients in whom THVs fail., Objectives: The authors sought to examine outcomes following redo-TAVR., Methods: The Redo-TAVR registry collected data on consecutive patients who underwent redo-TAVR at 37 centers. Patients were classified as probable TAVR failure or probable THV failure if they presented within or beyond 1 year of their index TAVR, respectively., Results: Among 63,876 TAVR procedures, 212 consecutive redo-TAVR procedures were identified (0.33%): 74 within and 138 beyond 1 year of the initial procedure. For these 2 groups, TAVR-to-redo-TAVR time was 68 (38 to 154) days and 5 (3 to 6) years. The indication for redo-TAVR was THV stenosis in 12 (16.2%) and 51 (37.0%) (p = 0.002) and regurgitation or combined stenosis-regurgitation in 62 (83.8%) and 86 (62.3%) (p = 0.028), respectively. Device success using VARC-2 criteria was achieved in 180 patients (85.1%); most failures were attributable to high residual gradients (14.1%) or regurgitation (8.9%). At 30-day and 1-year follow-up, residual gradients were 12.6 ± 7.5 mm Hg and 12.9 ± 9.0 mm Hg; valve area 1.63 ± 0.61 cm 2 and 1.51 ± 0.57 cm 2 ; and regurgitation ≤mild in 91% and 91%, respectively. Peri-procedural complication rates were low (3 stroke [1.4%], 7 valve malposition [3.3%], 2 coronary obstruction [0.9%], 20 new permanent pacemaker [9.6%], no mortality), and symptomatic improvement was substantial. Survival at 30 days was 94.6% and 98.5% (p = 0.101) and 83.6% and 88.3% (p = 0.335) at 1 year for patients presenting with early and late valve dysfunction, respectively., Conclusions: Redo-TAVR is a relatively safe and effective option for selected patients with valve dysfunction after TAVR. These results are important for applicability of TAVR in patients with long life expectancy in whom THV durability may be a concern., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objectives: This study reports an international experience using the transfemoral ACURATE neo transcatheter heart valve (Boston Scientific, Marlborough, Massachusetts) for the treatment of degenerated surgical aortic bioprostheses., Background: Transcatheter valve-in-valve procedures have emerged as an alternative to redo surgery. Supra-annular prostheses might be particularly useful in this indication., Methods: This is an international multicenter analysis including 85 patients from 14 centers in Europe and Canada undergoing an ACURATE neo valve-in-valve procedure from March 2015 to February 2019., Results: Internal diameter of the degenerated bioprosthesis was 20.3 ± 2.1 mm. Prosthesis size S was used in 70 (82%) procedures. The median depth of implantation was 3 mm and the upper crown of the ACURATE neo was positioned above the stent posts of the degenerated bioprosthesis in 54 (64%) and inside in 31 (36%). Mean transvalvular gradient before discharge was significantly lower if the upper crown was above the degenerated bioprosthesis (13.7 ± 5.9 mm Hg vs. 19.5 ± 10.0 mm Hg; p = 0.001). However, a high position of the ACURATE neo resulted in embolization in 1 patient, conversion to open-heart surgery in 1, and need for reintervention due to transcatheter heart valve failure within the first 18 months of follow-up in 4., Conclusions: This early experience shows that a high implantation of the ACURATE neo with the upper crown above the stent posts of the degenerated bioprosthesis resulted in lower mean transvalvular gradients but a higher rate of malpositioning and early valve degeneration., (Copyright © 2019 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The aim of this study is to assess long-term-outcomes of patients with concomitant CAD and COD treated with different revascularization strategies., Background: Multisite artery disease is common and patients with combined disease have poor prognosis. The best therapeutic strategy for patients with concomitant carotid obstructive disease (COD) and coronary artery disease (CAD) remains controversial., Methods: This observational registry enrolled, between January 2006 and December 2012, 1022 consecutive patients from high volume institutions with concomitant CAD and COD suitable for endovascular, surgical, or hybrid revascularization in both territories selected by consensus of a multidisciplinary team., Results: The cumulative incidence of 5-year major cardiovascular events (MACCE) including cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke in the overall population was 12%. The incidence of 5-year MACCE was not statistically different in the surgical, endovascular, or hybrid patients group (10.1% vs. 13.0% vs. 13.2%, P = .257, respectively). However, the hybrid group exhibited rates of myocardial infarction, chronic kidney disease, and cumulative incidence of all clinical events higher than the surgical group. After propensity score matching, the incidence of 5-year MACCE was similar in the three groups (13.0% vs. 15.0% vs. 16.0%, p = .947, respectively)., Conclusions: An individualized revascularization approach of patients with combined CAD and COD yields very good results at long-term follow-up, despite the high risk of this multilevel population even when the baseline clinical features are equalized., Competing Interests: The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest regarding the publication of this article., (Copyright © 2019 Fabrizio Tomai et al.)

Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical efficacy of dual-layered mesh-covered carotid stent systems (DLS) for carotid artery stenting (CAS)., Background: The need to minimize the risk for plaque debris prolapsing between stent struts following CAS has resulted in the development of DLS. Small clinical studies evaluating 2 available devices, Roadsaver and CGuard, have been recently published; none of these studies is sufficiently powered to test the role of common risk factors on the occurrence of stroke at 30 days post-CAS., Methods: A search was performed of multiple electronic databases for studies larger than 100 cases of CAS with DLS. Four single-arm prospective studies were identified, and individual patient data were collected. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of stroke at 30 days; secondary endpoints were technical and procedural success, periprocedural stroke, and in-hospital and 30-day rates of death., Results: The Roadsaver and CGuard stents were used in similar proportions, and technical success was achieved in all procedures (100% [n = 556]). There were 6 periprocedural strokes (1.08%; all minor). During 30-day follow-up, there was 1 death (0.17%) from myocardial infarction and 1 additional minor stroke (0.17%). The cumulative 30-day mortality rate was 0.17%, and the incidence of stroke at 30 days was 1.25%. No predictors of stroke at 30 days could be identified., Conclusions: This meta-analysis suggests that DLS can be safely used for CAS, and their use minimizes the incremental risk related to symptomatic status and other risk factors., (Copyright © 2018 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Delayed coronary obstruction (DCO) is an uncommon and barely reported complication following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR)., Objectives: The aim of this study was to describe the incidence and pathophysiological features of DCO after TAVR, obtained from a large international multicenter registry., Methods: Data were retrospectively collected from an international multicenter registry consisting of 18 centers between November 2005 and December 2016., Results: During the study period, 38 DCO (incidence 0.22%) cases were identified from a total of 17,092 TAVR procedures. DCO occurred more commonly after valve-in-valve procedures (0.89% vs. 0.18%; p < 0.001) and if self-expandable valves were used during the index procedure (0.36% vs. 0.11% balloon expandable; p < 0.01). DCO was most likely to occur ≤24 h after the TAVR procedure (47.4%; n = 18); 6 (15.8%) cases occurred between 24 h and ≤7 days, with the remaining 14 (36.8%) at ≥60 days. The most frequent presentation was cardiac arrest (31.6%; n = 12), followed by ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (23.7%; n = 9). The left coronary artery was obstructed in most cases (92.1%; n = 35). Percutaneous coronary intervention was attempted in the majority of cases (74.3% left main; 60% right coronary), and stent implantation was successful in 68.8%. The overall in-hospital death rate was 50% (n = 19), and was higher if DCO occurred ≤7 days from the index procedure (62.5% vs. 28.6%; p = 0.09)., Conclusions: DCO following TAVR is a rare phenomenon that is associated with a high in-hospital mortality rate. Clinicians should be aware that coronary obstruction can occur after the original TAVR procedure and have a low threshold for performing coronary angiography when clinically suspected., (Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Right anterior mini-thoracotomy (MIAVR) is a promising technique for aortic valve replacement. We aimed at comparing its outcomes with those obtained in a propensity-matched group of patients undergoing sternotomy at our two high-volume centers., Methods: Main clinical and operative data of patients undergoing aortic valve replacement between January 2010 and May 2016 were retrospectively collected. A total of 678 patients were treated with a standard full sternotomy approach, while MIAVR was performed in 502. Propensity score matching identified 363 patients per each group., Results: In-hospital mortality was not significantly different between the propensity-matched groups (1.7% in MIAVR patients vs. 2.2% in conventional sternotomy patients; P=0.79). No significant difference in the incidence of major post-operative complications was observed. Post-operative ventilation times (median 7, range 5-12 hours in MIAVR patients vs. median 7, range 5-12 in conventional sternotomy patients; P=0.72) were not significantly different between the two groups. Cardiopulmonary bypass time (61.0±21.0 vs. 65.9±24.7 min in conventional sternotomy group; P<0.01) and aortic cross-clamping time (48.3±16.7 vs. 53.2±19.6 min in full sternotomy group; P<0.01) were shorter in MIAVR group. EuroSCORE (OR 1.52, 95% CI, 1.12-2.06; P<0.01) was found to be the only independent predictor of intra-hospital mortality in the whole propensity-matched population., Conclusions: Our experience shows that mini-access isolated aortic valve surgery is a reproducible, safe and effective procedure with similar outcomes and no longer operative times compared to conventional sternotomy., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Background: Patients with failed bioprostheses are an increasing population at high risk for redo surgery. Valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation is a promising alternative but a limited number of first-generation devices have proven efficacy in all cases., Methods: Patients with degenerated bioprostheses at high risk for redo surgery were included in the registry after being assigned to valve-in-valve intervention by a local heart team. Main basal and follow-up data (at 1 month and 6 months) of patients undergoing valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation with the Lotus valve system (Boston Scientific, Natick, MA) in three high-volume Italian centers were entered in the registry., Results: Twelve patients (aged 71.1 ± 14.1 years, 66% male, logistic European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation score 28.8 ± 22.9) were included in the registry. Implantation success rate was 92%; in 1 patient, the valve was completely retrieved because of unsatisfactory gradients after valve positioning. All procedures were done through femoral access, and all but one required only local anesthesia. In patients with stenosis as pure or mixed mechanism for degeneration (n = 7), mean ventriculoaortic gradient decreased from 46.7 ± 7.0 mm Hg to 16.6 ± 5.7 mm Hg (p < 0.001). No patients had more than mild aortic regurgitation at hospital discharge. Results where confirmed at 1-month and 6-month follow-up, with improvement of New York Heart Association functional status in all patients (functional class I to II in 100% of patients)., Conclusions: The valve-in-valve procedure using the Lotus valve is a feasible alternative to repeat surgery in high-risk patients with degenerated bioprostheses. Using the Lotus valve in this challenging and increasingly frequent scenario could offer a safe and effective strategy that should be explored in larger clinical trials., (Copyright © 2017 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: For a long time, a bicuspid valve has been considered a contraindication to transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) due to worse procedural results. Currently available technologies are changing the scenario, with initial experiences reporting much better results with second-generation devices. Areas covered: This review will analyze the risk and potential pitfalls of TAVI on bicuspid valves and will try ascertain how the use of a new-generation fully repositionable device, the Lotus Valve System (LVS), could improve procedural and clinical results in bicuspid anatomies. Expert commentary: The LVS offers relevant potential advantages that could be helpful in bicuspid anatomies: its mechanical controlled expansion can reduce the risk of elliptical deployment; its adaptive seal may reduce final paravalvular leak and give the possibility of checking the final result before final deployment, with the opportunity of fully resheating or repositioning, which is crucial to minimize malpositioning and abolish final residual gradients. Although limited in population, preliminary data show good outcomes with LVS on bicuspid anatomies. Future studies are to be encouraged to confirm whether this device could be considered the first choice in this challenging anatomy and whether clinical outcomes, in presence of an excellent procedural result, could be ever compared to those obtained with surgery.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to appraise 2-year outcomes after percutaneous transluminal angioplasty of long femoropopliteal artery disease using paclitaxel-coated balloons (PCBs)., Background: Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty with PCBs for TransAtlantic Inter-Society Consensus types C and D femoropopliteal artery disease has provided favorable results ≤12 months but no prospective studies performed longer term follow-up assessment., Methods: Consecutive patients with Rutherford class 2 to 4 disease due to femoropopliteal lesions >15 cm long were prospectively enrolled in a multicenter study. The primary study endpoint was primary patency (i.e., freedom from the combined endpoint of clinically driven target lesion revascularization and >50% restenosis in the treated lesion as appraised by a duplex ultrasound peak systolic velocity ratio of >2.4) at 24 months. Secondary endpoints included major adverse events (the composite of death, target limb amputation, thrombosis at the target lesion, or clinically driven nontarget lesion revascularization), changes in Rutherford class, and quality of life ≤24 months post-procedure., Results: A total of 105 patients (age 68 ± 9 years; 81.9% men) successfully treated with PCBs were included (treated lesion length was 251 ± 71 mm; 49.5% total occlusions). The 24-month follow-up data were available in 98 patients; they showed a primary patency rate of 70.4%, with major adverse events occurred in 10 patients (10.2%, 5 non-procedure-related deaths) and persistently significant clinical benefits in Rutherford class (51% of asymptomatic patients at 24 months)., Conclusions: PCBs benefits on primary patency and target vessel revascularization satisfactorily extend over 24 months in patients undergoing percutaneous transluminal angioplasty for symptomatic femoropopliteal disease., (Copyright © 2017 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The optimal management of cardiogenic shock (CS) occurring in the presence of acute coronary syndromes, severe aortic stenosis, and poor left ventricular function has not been established. Recently, the availability of new assistance devices and techniques has provided novel management opportunities. In particular, when compared with surgical approaches, percutaneous procedures have the advantage of allowing "staged" interventions, in which different steps are planned according to the patient's evolving clinical conditions., Case Presentation: A woman was admitted with an acute coronary syndrome complicated by CS on a background of severe aortic stenosis, severe left ventricular dysfunction, and severe calcific peripheral artery disease. We successfully treated her with emergency percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) to left main stem followed by balloon aortic valvuloplasty (BAV). After BAV, acute aortic regurgitation developed with sudden hemodynamic collapse. In such a catastrophic setting, we successfully achieved immediate stabilization by implantation of an Impella CP device (Abiomed). After 1 day of Impella CP assistance, we successfully performed elective transfemoral aortic revalving through the same femoral access by facilitating device crossing and hemostasis with transradial balloon peripheral angioplasty and by practicing a novel technique we called "pump rewiring.", Conclusion: This case example demonstrates how a tailored step-by-step strategy including PCI, BAV, peripheral angioplasty, percutaneous ventricular assistance, and transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) allowed the successful treatment of a critical patient with CS. Impella CP could be considered an effective bridge to TAVI in patients developing aortic regurgitation after BAV, since maintaining arterial access can be achieved using the pump-rewiring technique.

Background: Inflammation, platelet reactivity and cardiac autonomic dysfunction increase the risk of cardiovascular events, but the relationships between these prognostic markers are poorly defined. In this study, we investigated the effect of an inflammatory stimulus (influenza A vaccine) on platelet activation and cardiac autonomic function., Methods: We measured serum C-reactive protein (CRP) and interleukin-6 levels, monocyte-platelet aggregates (MPAs) and monocyte/platelet receptor expression before and after adjuvant influenza A vaccination in 28 patients with type II diabetes (mean age 62.1 ± 8 years, 18 men). Twenty-four-hour Holter electrocardiogram was recorded 24 h before and after vaccination; heart rate variability (HRV) was assessed as a measure of cardiac autonomic function., Results: Inflammatory cytokines, MPA formation and monocyte/platelet receptor expression increased after vaccination. CRP was 2.6 ± 2.8 and 7.1 ± 5.7 mg L⁻¹ 48 h before and after vaccination, respectively (P < 0.0001). HRV parameters decreased after vaccination compared to baseline, with very low-frequency amplitude showing the most significant change (34.6 ± 11.8 and 31.0 ± 10.2 ms 48 h before and after vaccination, respectively; P = 0.002). A significant correlation was found between percentage changes in CRP levels and in most HRV variables, with the most significant correlations between changes in CRP levels and changes in standard deviation of all normal RR intervals (r = 0.43; P = 0.02)., Conclusions: Together with an inflammatory reaction, influenza A vaccine induced platelet activation and sympathovagal imbalance towards adrenergic predominance. Significant correlations were found between CRP levels and HRV parameters, suggesting a pathophysiological link between inflammation and cardiac autonomic regulation. The vaccine-related platelet activation and cardiac autonomic dysfunction may transiently increase the risk of cardiovascular events., (© 2010 The Association for the Publication of the Journal of Internal Medicine.)

Background: Drug-eluting stents (DES) have reduced restenosis following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), but they seem to be associated with increased coronary endothelial dysfunction compared to bare metal stents (BMS). No data are available about the prognostic value of exercise stress test (EST) in PCI patients in the DES era., Methods and Results: The 160 patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) who underwent PCI with either BMS (n=86) or DES (n=74) were studied. EST was performed 1 month after PCI. DES patients had a higher rate of positive EST compared to BMS patients (49% vs 32%; P=0.03). At a median follow-up of 18 months DES showed a lower rate of target vessel revascularization (TVR) (hazard ratio (HR) 0.37, P=0.07), but a higher rate of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) (HR 3.33, P=0.08). At multivariate Cox-regression time to 1 mm ST and low-workload ischemia were independent predictors of AMI (HR 0.96, P=0.03; and HR 6.24, P=0.009, respectively), as well as of TVR (HR 0.96, P=0.007; and HR 6.43, P=0.001, respectively)., Conclusions: DES implantation is associated with a higher rate of positive EST, compared to BMS, 1 month after PCI, likely due to a higher prevalence of endothelial dysfunction. EST seems to be helpful in predicting clinical outcome in patients with coronary stent implantation.