Search

Aims: There is an increasing awareness of gender-related differences in patients with severe aortic stenosis and their outcomes after surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) and transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI)., Methods: Data from the IMPULSE registry were analysed. Patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) were enrolled between March 2015 and April 2017 and stratified by gender. A subgroup analysis was performed to assess the impact of age., Results: Overall, 2171 patients were enrolled, and 48.0% were female. Women were characterised by a higher rate of renal impairment (31.7 vs 23.3%; p<0.001), were at higher surgical risk (EuroSCORE II: 4.5 vs 3.6%; p=0.001) and more often in a critical preoperative state (7.0vs 4.2%; p=0.003). Men had an increased rate of previous cardiac surgery (9.4 vs 4.7%; p<0.001) and a reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (4.9 vs 1.3%; p<0.001). Concomitant mitral and tricuspid valve disease was substantially more common among women. Symptoms were highly prevalent in both women and men (83.6 vs 77.3%; p<0.001). AVR was planned in 1379 cases. Women were more frequently scheduled to undergo TAVI (49.3 vs 41.0%; p<0.001) and less frequently for SAVR (20.3 vs 27.5%; p<0.001)., Conclusions: The present data show that female patients with severe AS have a distinct patient profile and are managed in a different way to males. Gender-based differences in the management of patients with severe AS need to be taken into account more systematically to improve outcomes, especially for women., Competing Interests: Competing interests: PB is the representative of the IPPMed, Cloppenburg, Germany. NF, RPS and DM-Z have received honoraria for advisory board meetings and TKR speakers’ honoraria from Edwards Lifesciences. The institutions of these three and those of the remaining authors representing study centres have received funding for employing a study nurse. JK and MT are employees of the funder of this registry. As this is a disease registry, neither the type of intervention (SAVR, TAVI or medical management) nor on the valves to be used was pre-specified., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: Contemporary data on patients with previously undiagnosed severe aortic stenosis (AS) are scarce. We aimed to address this gap by gathering data from consecutive patients diagnosed with severe AS on echocardiography., Methods: This was a prospective, multicentre, multinational, registry in 23 tertiary care hospitals across 9 European countries. Patients with a diagnosis of severe AS were included using echocardiography (aortic valve area (AVA) <1 cm 2 , indexed AVA <0.6 cm 2 /m 2 , maximum jet-velocity (V max ) >4 m/s and/or mean transvalvular gradient >40 mm Hg)., Results: The 2171 participants had a mean age of 77.9 years and 48.0% were female. The mean AVA was 0.73 cm 2 , V max 4.3 m/s and mean gradient 47.1 mm Hg; 62.1% had left ventricular hypertrophy and 27.3% an ejection fraction (EF) <50%. 1743 patients (80.3%) were symptomatic (shortness-of-breath 91.0%; dizziness 30.2%, chest pain 28.9%). Patients had a EuroSCORE II of 4.0; 25.3% had a creatinine clearance <50 mL/min, and 3.2% had an EF <30%. Symptomatic patients were older and had more comorbidities than asymptomatic patients. Despite European Society of Cardiology 2017 valvular heart disease guideline class I recommendation, in only 76.2% a decision was made for an intervention (transcatheter 50.4%, surgical aortic valve replacement 25.8%). In asymptomatic patients, 57.7% with a class I/IIa indication were scheduled for a procedure, while 36.3% patients without an indication had their valve replaced., Conclusions: The majority of patients with severe AS presented at an advanced disease stage. Management of severe AS remained suboptimal in a significant proportion of contemporary patients with severe AS., Trial Registration Number: NCT02241447;Results., Competing Interests: Competing interests: PB is the representative of the IPPMed. NF, RPS, TKR and DM-Z have received speakers’ honoraria from Edwards Lifesciences. The institutions of these three and those of the remaining authors representing study centers have received funding from the sponsor for employing a study nurse for the duration of the study. IPPMed designed and executed the study, collected and analysed the data and drafted/revised the manuscript in collaboration with the other authors., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Aims: Preliminary data on Sapien 3 valve (S3-THV) use for transcatheter aortic valve implantation have shown an increased permanent pacemaker implantation (PPMI) rate with respect to Sapien XT valve. Aim of this study was to investigate the role of S3-THV position in the left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) on electrocardiographic changes suggestive of atrioventricular (ΔPR) and/or intraventricular (ΔQRS) conduction abnormalities and 30 days PPMI rate., Methods and Results: Eighty-six consecutive patients treated with S3-THV were included in the study. All patients underwent clinical and electrocardiogram evaluation. Left ventricular outflow tract prosthesis depth was assessed by fluoroscopy and expressed quantitatively (mm) and as aorto-ventricular ratio (AVR). Eight patients (9.3%) needed PPMI at 30 days. A low AVR (≤60/40) predicted PPMI (OR = 6.09, 95% CI 1.19-31.01, P = 0.030) and resulted into higher PPMI rate, compared with higher AVR (30.0 vs. 6.6%, P = 0.017). For each millimetre increase in the LVOT prosthesis depth PPMI risk increased by 1.41 times (95% CI 1.06-1.87, P = 0.017). In patients with low AVR, ΔPR was higher than in those with higher AVR (33.4 ± 56.7 vs. 12.1 ± 19.4 ms, P = 0.021) and ΔPR was associated to LVOT prosthesis depth (β = 0.286, P = 0.009). Furthermore, ΔPR was associated with risk of PPMI (OR = 1.03, 95% CI 1.01-1.06, P = 0.024)., Conclusions: A low AVR is associated to higher ΔPR and PPMI rates. The correlation between LVOT prosthesis depth with ΔPR and higher PPMI rate suggests the need of a careful S3-THV implantation., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author 2016. For permissions please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Introduction: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) technique represents a real revolution in the field of interventional cardiology and medicine, in particular for the treatment of severe aortic valve stenosis in elderly patients or in patients when the periprocedural risk for the traditional surgical option is considered too high, as an alternative to the traditional aortic valve replacement. Although experience on the valves of the last generation is still limited in terms of time, the data currently available are definitely moving in the direction of a minimum hospital mortality (1%) as well as a drastic reduction in the incidence of complications when compared to the devices of the previous generation. Finally, the evolution of specified materials of the newest generation have greatly enhanced safety and efficacy of TAVI procedures in the last years. In order to ensure the selection of the most appropriate valve and the success of the procedure, the role of cardiac imaging (computed tomography scan evaluation and angiography) is crucial. These examinations require the use of contrast medium in patients suffering from renal dysfunction at the baseline. The need for fluoroscopy and angiography using contrast agents to aid positioning of the valve may lead to contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN) as one form or one etiology of acute kidney injury (AKI), which is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. The aim of our study is to investigate the accuracy of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS-a technique which does not need contrast) for the assessment of native valve measures in patients undergoing TAVI by comparing values obtained with IVUS to those ones previously obtained in the same patients with computed tomography (CT) scans., Material and Methods: We enrolled 25 consecutive patients (10 males, average age 81.3±5,1 years) who underwent TAVI with femoral access in our Cardiac Surgery Cath-Lab (University of Bari) from January to October 2015 (Logistic EuroSCORE 21.6±15.4%; STS score mortality 20.9±14.9%). Each patient scheduled for TAVI underwent coronary angiography and high resolution angio-CT in order to obtain a complete evaluation (diameters, perimeters, and areas at annulus level, -3mm level, +15mm level, height of coronary ostia, shape, and conformation of left ventricle outflow tract, conformation, and calcifications of aortic and ileo-femoral axis) to choose the most suitable prosthetic aortic valve for each patient. In all patients, during the procedure (before the prosthetic valve implantation), we executed a manual IVUS pullback (from left ventricle outflow tract to ascending aorta) by using a 7F IVUS probe (Volcano Corporation, San Diego, CA). On the recorded IVUS pullback, a second operator (who did not know the values obtained by CT measurements) identified the aortic annulus and, at this level, measured: minimum and maximum diameter; perimeter; derived perimeter, and area. The t-student test has been used to compare the averages of these IVUS values to the CT ones. A p value< 0.05 was considered as statistically significant., Results: Independently from the kind and size of implanted prosthetic valve, no statistical differences were found when the averages of all considered parameters (obtained both with CT and IVUS) were compared. The following are the results obtained: minimum diameter (CT: 19,62mm±1,10 vs. IVUS: 19,55mm±1,40; p=0.41); maximum diameter (CT: 24,73mm±2,42 vs. IVUS: 25,9mm±1,80; p=0.08); perimeter (CT: 72,05mm±4,36 vs. IVUS: 73,32mm±6,09; p=0.164); derived perimeter (CT: 22,94mm±1,40 vs. IVUS: 23,32mm ± 1,95; p=0,198); and area (CT: 3,99cm2 ±0,97 vs. IVUS: 4,06 cm2 ± 0,47; p=0,073) (Figs. 1-3)., Conclusions: These preliminary data suggest accurate IVUS measures when compared to CT in the evaluation of valve parameters considered (minimum and maximum diameters, area, perimeter, and derived perimeter at the annulus level). In order to confirm these findings and to give them statistical significance, it will be necessary to increase the sample size.