Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Prior Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: Trends in Utilization and Propensity-Matched Analysis of In-Hospital Outcomes

Acute kidney injury and in-hospital outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients without chronic kidney disease: insights from the national inpatient sample

BACKGROUND

Acute kidney injury (AKI) complicates transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), leading to higher mortality. The incidence and effects of AKI on clinical outcomes in patients undergoing TAVR without chronic kidney disease (CKD) are unclear. We aimed to determine the association between AKI and in-hospital outcomes in patients with TAVR using propensity score matching (PSM).

METHODS

Using International Classification of Diseases-10th Revision codes, we queried the National Inpatient Sample for TAVR performed between 2016 and 2021. Patients were divided into two groups according to perioperative AKI development. Patients with CKD or on permanent hemodialysis at baseline were excluded. We conducted 1:1 PSM to assemble a cohort of patients with similar baseline characteristics. Multivariate logistic regression was used to assess the association between AKI and in-hospital outcomes. Sensitivity analysis was conducted to evaluate the robustness of our inferences.

RESULTS

Of 47,372 unweighted patient admissions for TAVR, 1617 (3.41%) had a concomitant diagnosis of AKI. The incidence of AKI decreased from 4.82 to 3.18% from 2016 to 2021 (P-trend < 0.01). Before PSM, patients with AKI had a significantly higher rate of in-hospital mortality compared with those without AKI (6.12% vs. 0.48%, respectively; odds ratio [OR] 8.59, 95% confidence interval [CI] 6.32-11.68). Using the PSM algorithm, 1579 well-matched patients were included in each group. After PSM, an association was observed between patients with TAVR and concomitant AKI and a higher risk of in-hospital mortality (6.21% vs. 1.08%, respectively; OR 5.96; 95% CI 3.54-10.04). In subgroup analyses stratified according to age (≤ 80 and > 80 years), sex (male/female), and hypertension status, consistent associations were observed between AKI and the risk of in-hospital mortality. AKI patients were at higher risk for acute myocardial infarction (OR 1.78, 95% CI 1.35-2.34), major bleeding (OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.13-2.33), blood transfusion (OR 1.65, 95% CI 1.28-2.11), and cardiogenic shock (OR 3.73, 95% CI 2.77-5.01). No significant betweengroup differences were observed in stroke (P = 0.12).

CONCLUSION

AKI was a strong predictor of in-hospital mortality in patients undergoing TAVR without CKD and was associated with higher post-procedure complication rates.

Decision-Making Approach to the Treatment of Young and Low-Risk Patients With Aortic Stenosis

Over a decade of randomized controlled trial data demonstrate excellent outcomes with transcatheter aortic valve replacement or surgical aortic valve replacement for patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis regardless of surgical risk. The 2020 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines recommend both options for low-risk AS patients aged 65 to 80 years. However, the fastest growing population of patients receiving transcatheter aortic valve replacement in the United States is <65 years old, with little data to support the practice. The American College of Cardiology's Cardiac Surgery Team Section Leadership and Interventional Cardiology Councils, a multidisciplinary collaboration of cardiologists and cardiac surgeons, sought to summarize the relevant data into a decision-making tool for heart valve teams. A literature review was completed, and guidelines, randomized controlled trials, and large observational studies were summarized into a pragmatic decision-making approach to treating young and low-risk patients with AS.

Transcatheter vs. surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with aortic stenosis and cardiogenic shock

AIMS

Patients with aortic stenosis (AS) and cardiogenic shock (CS) are an extremely high-risk population with a poor prognosis in the absence of definitive therapy. We aimed to compare the outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with those of surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients with AS-CS.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We queried the Nationwide Readmission Database (2016-21) to identify patients hospitalized for AS-CS who underwent isolated TAVR or SAVR. In-hospital outcomes of TAVR vs. SAVR were compared using multivariable regression and propensity-matching analyses. Ninety-day readmissions were compared using a Cox proportional hazards regression model. A total of 16 161 patients were hospitalized for AS-CS, of whom 6470 (40.0%) underwent isolated TAVR and 9691 (60.0%) underwent isolated SAVR. From 2016 through 2021, the proportion of TAVR increased from 29.5 to 46.5% and the proportion of SAVR correspondingly decreased in AS-CS (Ptrend < 0.01). After adjustment for baseline characteristics, TAVR was associated with lower odds of stroke [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.47-0.84], acute kidney injury (aOR 0.80, 95% CI 0.69-0.93), and major bleeding (aOR 0.54, 95% CI 0.40-0.71) and higher odds of vascular complications (aOR 1.56, 95% CI 1.23-1.97) compared with SAVR. In-hospital mortality, myocardial infarction, permanent pacemaker placement, and 90-day all-cause and heart failure readmissions showed similar rates between TAVR and SAVR. However, hospital length of stay was shorter and total costs and non-home discharges were lower with TAVR than with SAVR.

CONCLUSION

This nationwide observational analysis showed that TAVR is increasingly performed in patients with AS-CS and is associated with similar rates of in-hospital mortality and 90-day readmissions but lower rates of in-hospital complications and resource utilization compared with SAVR.

Multimodal Analytical Tools to Enhance Mechanistic Understanding of Aortic Valve Calcification

This review focuses on technologies at the core of calcific aortic valve disease (CAVD) and drug target research advancement, including transcriptomics, proteomics, and molecular imaging. We examine how bulk RNA sequencing and single-cell RNA sequencing have engendered organismal genomes and transcriptomes, promoting the analysis of tissue gene expression profiles and cell subpopulations, respectively. We bring into focus how the field is also largely influenced by increasingly accessible proteome profiling techniques. In unison, global transcriptional and protein expression analyses allow for increased understanding of cellular behavior and pathogenic pathways under pathologic stimuli including stress, inflammation, low-density lipoprotein accumulation, increased calcium and phosphate levels, and vascular injury. We also look at how direct investigation of protein signatures paves the way for identification of targetable pathways for pharmacologic intervention. Here, we note that imaging techniques, once a clinical diagnostic tool for late-stage CAVD, have since been refined to address a clinical need to identify microcalcifications using positron emission tomography/computed tomography and even detect in vivo cellular events indicative of early stage CAVD and map the expression of identified proteins in animal models. Together, these techniques generate a holistic approach to CAVD investigation, with the potential to identify additional novel regulatory pathways.

Staged Versus Concomitant Carotid Endarterectomy and Aortic Valve Replacement: A Case Report and Literature Review

Stroke is a common complication of cardiac surgery, and carotid artery stenosis is an established risk factor for stroke. Therefore, patients with carotid artery stenosis who are undergoing cardiac surgery require proper management of the former either simultaneously or before cardiac surgery. We present a challenging case of a 67-year-old male patient who presented with generalized weakness, severe aortic stenosis, and significant bilateral carotid artery stenosis. The coexistence of these findings sparked a debate about whether to perform a carotid endarterectomy first or an aortic valve replacement. Moreover, a past history of percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafts made the decision more challenging. Multiple approaches have been employed for the management of coexisting carotid artery stenosis with cardiac surgery; however, no definitive guidelines exist, especially for surgeries other than coronary artery bypass grafts or where the carotid stenosis is bilateral and severe.

Outcomes of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implant Among Patients With A Previous Coronary Artery Bypass Graft: A Nationwide Analysis

There is a paucity of data regarding the temporal trends and outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve implant (TAVI) among patients with a previous coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery. We queried the Nationwide Readmissions Database (2016 to 2019) for hospitalized patients who underwent TAVI using the appropriate International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision procedural codes. A multivariable regression analysis was used to adjust for the patients' and hospitals' characteristics in comparing the study groups. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. The final analysis included 237,829 patients who underwent TAVI, of whom 42,671 (17.9%) had a previous CABG. During the study period, there was a decrease in the proportion of patients with previous CABG who underwent TAVI (21.0% in 2016 vs 15.5% in 2019, ptrend = 0.01), although there was no change in their in-hospital mortality rate (1.08% in 2016 vs 1.25% in 2019, ptrend = 0.43). Patients with a previous CABG were younger and less likely to be women than those without a previous CABG. TAVI among those with a previous CABG was associated with lower in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.79, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.69 to 0.91), similar rate of ischemic stroke (aOR 0.81, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.93) and permanent pacemaker implant (aOR 1.00, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.05). Patients with a previous CABG had a lower all-cause 90-day readmission (odds ratio 0.95, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.06) but higher readmission for transient ischemic attack. Among those with a previous CABG, female gender and chronic kidney disease stage ≥3 were independently associated with a higher in-hospital mortality, whereas obesity was associated with a lower in-hospital mortality. In conclusion, there was a decrease in the proportion of patients with a previous CABG among those who underwent TAVI. TAVI among those with a previous CABG was not associated with increased in-hospital adverse events or 90-day all-cause readmissions.

Comparison of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Devices in Aortic Stenosis: A Network Meta-Analysis of 42,105 Patients

Background: In recent years, trans-catheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has emerged as an excellent alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). Currently, there are several approved devices on the market, yet comparisons among them are scarce. We aimed to compare the various devices via a network meta-analysis. Methods: We performed a network meta-analysis including randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and propensity-matched studies that provide comparisons of either a single TAVI with SAVR or two different TAVI devices and report clinical outcomes. Results: We included 12 RCT and 13 propensity-matched studies comprising 42,105 patients, among whom 27,134 underwent TAVI using various valve systems (Sapien & Sapien XT, Sapien 3, Corvalve, Evolut & Evolut Pro, Acurate Neo, Portico). The mean follow-up time was 23.4 months. Sapien 3 was superior over SAVR in the reduction of all-cause mortality (OR = 0.53; 95%CrI 0.31–0.91), while no significant difference existed between other devices and SAVR. Aortic regurgitation was more frequent among TAVI devices compared to SAVR. There was no significant difference between the various THVs and SAVR in cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, NYHA class III-IV, and endocarditis. Conclusions: Newer generation TAVI devices, especially Sapien 3 and Evolut R/Pro are associated with improved outcomes compared to SAVR and other devices of the older generation.

Comparison of rehabilitation outcomes for transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement as redo procedure in patients with previous cardiac surgery: Evidence based on 11 observational studies

BACKGROUND

Currently, the number of severe aortic stenosis (AS) patients with a history of prior cardiac surgery (PCS) has increased. Both transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and traditional surgical aortic valve replacement (sAVR) are effective therapy for AS. However, PCS increases the risk of adverse outcomes in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement. Thus, this meta-analysis was designed to comparatively evaluate the impact of PCS on clinical outcomes between TAVR and sAVR.

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science up to February 1, 2021 was conducted for relevant studies that comparing TAVR and sAVR for severe AS patients with a history of PCS. The primary outcome was the non-inferiority of TAVR and sAVR in mortality. The secondary outcomes were the other clinical outcomes. Two reviewers assessed trial quality and extracted the data independently. All statistical analyses were performed using the standard statistical procedures provided in Review Manager 5.2.

RESULTS

A total of 11 studies including 8852 patients were identified. The pooled results indicated that there was no difference in 30-day, and 1-year all-cause mortality between TAVR and sAVR. No significant difference was also observed in total follow-up and cardiovascular mortality between TAVR and sAVR. However, subgroup analysis revealed significantly higher 1-year all-cause mortality (OR 1.92; 95% CI 1.05-3.52; P = .04) and total follow-up mortality (OR 2.28; 95% CI 1.09-4.77; P = .03) in TAVR than sAVR for patients with a history of coronary artery bypass graft, aortic valve replacement, and mitral valve reconstruction. In addition, TAVR experienced higher pacemaker implantation than sAVR. However, compared with sAVR, TAVR experienced shorter length of stay (MD -3.18 days; 95% CI -4.78 to -1.57 days) and procedural time (MD -172.01 minutes; 95% CI -251.15 to -92.88) respectively. TAVR also lead to much less bleeding than sAVR.

CONCLUSIONS

Our analysis shows that TAVR as a redo procedure was equal to sAVR in mortality for severe AS patients with PCS, especially coronary artery bypass graft. We agree the advantage of TAVR as a redo procedure for patients with a history of PCS. Patients receiving TAVR experienced rapid recovery, shorter operation time and less bleeding, without increasing short and long term mortality.

A Sneak-Peek into the Physician's Brain: A Retrospective Machine Learning-Driven Investigation of Decision-Making in TAVR versus SAVR for Young High-Risk Patients with Severe Symptomatic Aortic Stenosis

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has rapidly become a viable alternative to the conventional isolated surgical aortic valve replacement (iSAVR) for treating severe symptomatic aortic stenosis. However, data on younger patients is scarce and a gap exists between data-based recommendations and the clinical use of TAVR. In our study, we utilized a machine learning (ML) driven approach to model the complex decision-making process of Heart Teams when treating young patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis with either TAVR or iSAVR and to identify the relevant considerations. Out of the considered factors, the variables most prominently featured in our ML model were congestive heart failure, established risk assessment scores, previous cardiac surgeries, a reduced left ventricular ejection fraction and peripheral vascular disease. Our study demonstrates a viable application of ML-based approaches for studying and understanding complex clinical decision-making processes.

Transcatheter and Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Previous Cardiac Surgery: A Meta-Analysis

Background: Many patients who have aortic stenosis and are transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) candidates have underwent prior cardiac surgery (PCS). The aim of this study was to provide a robust summary comparison between patients with PCS who underwent TAVR vs. surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR).

Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of all published articles on PubMed/Medline, Ovid, EMBASE, and Scopus from 2002 to 2019.

Results: A total of 13 studies were finally included, yielding a total of 23,148 participants. There was no statistical difference with 30-day [OR: 1.02 (0.86–1.21)] or 1-year mortality [OR: 1.18 (0.86–1.61)] between the two groups. Subgroup analysis revealed that high-risk patients who underwent TAVR with the transapical approach were associated with increased risk of mortality [OR: 1.45 (1.00–2.11)]. However, those who underwent TAVR with endovascular approach had a comparable outcome with SAVR.

Conclusions: Primary outcomes after endovascular TAVR were similar to those with SAVR and superior to transapical TAVR treatment group in patients with PCS.

Machine-Learning-Based In-Hospital Mortality Prediction for Transcatheter Mitral Valve Repair in the United States

BACKGROUND

Transcatheter mitral valve repair (TMVR) utilization has increased significantly in the United States over the last years. Yet, a risk-prediction tool for adverse events has not been developed. We aimed to generate a machine-learning-based algorithm to predict in-hospital mortality after TMVR.

METHODS

Patients who underwent TMVR from 2012 through 2015 were identified using the National Inpatient Sample database. The study population was randomly divided into a training set (n = 636) and a testing set (n = 213). Prediction models for in-hospital mortality were obtained using five supervised machine-learning classifiers.

RESULTS

A total of 849 TMVRs were analyzed in our study. The overall in-hospital mortality was 3.1%. A naïve Bayes (NB) model had the best discrimination for fifteen variables, with an area under the receiver-operating curve (AUC) of 0.83 (95% CI, 0.80-0.87), compared to 0.77 for logistic regression (95% CI, 0.58-0.95), 0.73 for an artificial neural network (95% CI, 0.55-0.91), and 0.67 for both a random forest and a support-vector machine (95% CI, 0.47-0.87). History of coronary artery disease, of chronic kidney disease, and smoking were the three most significant predictors of in-hospital mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

We developed a robust machine-learning-derived model to predict in-hospital mortality in patients undergoing TMVR. This model is promising for decision-making and deserves further clinical validation.

Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients with Cardiac Surgery: Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review of the Literature

The number of patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) and a history of prior cardiac surgery has increased. Prior cardiac surgery increases the risk of adverse outcomes in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement. To evaluate the impact of prior cardiac surgery on clinical endpoints in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) versus surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR), we performed a literature search using PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar, and Scopus databases. The clinical endpoints included in our study were 30-day mortality, 1-2-year mortality, acute kidney injury (AKI), bleeding, stroke, procedural time, and duration of hospital stay. Seven studies, which included a total of 8221 patients, were selected. Our study found that TAVR was associated with a lower incidence of stroke and bleeding complications. There was no significant difference in terms of AKI, 30-day all-cause mortality, and 1-2-year all-cause mortality between the two groups. The average procedure time and duration of hospital stay were 170 min less (p ≤ 0.01) and 3.6 days shorter (p < 0.01) in patients with TAVR, respectively. In patients with prior coronary artery bypass graft and severe AS, both TAVR and SAVR are reasonable options. However, TAVR may be associated with a lower incidence of complications like stroke and perioperative bleeding, in addition to a shorter length of stay.

Adverse clinical outcomes in patients undergoing both PCI and TAVR: Analysis from a pooled multi-center registry

BACKGROUND

There is a paucity of data regarding the optimum timing of PCI in relation to TAVR.

OBJECTIVE

We compared the major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) rates among patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) before transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with those who received PCI with/after TAVR.

METHODS

In this multicenter study, we pooled all consecutive patients who underwent TAVR at three high volume centers.

RESULTS

Among 3,982 patients who underwent TAVR, 327 (8%) patients underwent PCI within 1 year before TAVR, 38 (1%) had PCI the same day as TAVR and 15 (0.5%) had PCI within 2 months after TAVR. Overall, among patients who received both PCI and TAVR (n = 380), history of previous CABG (HR:0.501; p = .001), higher BMI at TAVR (HR:0.970; p = .038), and statin therapy after TAVR (HR:0.660, p = .037) were independently associated with lower MACCE while warfarin therapy after TAVR was associated with a higher risk of MACCE (HR:1.779, p = .017). Patients who received PCI within 1 year before TAVR had similar baseline demographics, STS scores, clinical risk factors when compared to patients receiving PCI with/after TAVR. Both groups were similar in PCI (Syntax Score, ACC/AHA lesion class) and TAVR (valve types, access) related variables. There were no significant differences in terms of MACCE (log rank p = .550), all-cause mortality (log rank p = .433), strokes (log rank p = .153), and repeat PCI (log rank p = .054) in patients who underwent PCI with/after TAVR when compared to patients who received PCI before TAVR.

CONCLUSION

Among patients who underwent both PCI and TAVR, history of CABG, higher BMI, and statin therapy had lower, while those discharged on warfarin, had higher adverse event rates. Adverse events rates were similar regardless of timing of PCI.

Machine Learning Prediction Models for In-Hospital Mortality After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to develop and compare an array of machine learning methods to predict in-hospital mortality after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in the United States.

BACKGROUND

Existing risk prediction tools for in-hospital complications in patients undergoing TAVR have been designed using statistical modeling approaches and have certain limitations.

METHODS

Patient data were obtained from the National Inpatient Sample database from 2012 to 2015. The data were randomly divided into a development cohort (n = 7,615) and a validation cohort (n = 3,268). Logistic regression, artificial neural network, naive Bayes, and random forest machine learning algorithms were applied to obtain in-hospital mortality prediction models.

RESULTS

A total of 10,883 TAVRs were analyzed in our study. The overall in-hospital mortality was 3.6%. Overall, prediction models' performance measured by area under the curve were good (>0.80). The best model was obtained by logistic regression (area under the curve: 0.92; 95% confidence interval: 0.89 to 0.95). Most obtained models plateaued after introducing 10 variables. Acute kidney injury was the main predictor of in-hospital mortality ranked with the highest mean importance in all the models. The National Inpatient Sample TAVR score showed the best discrimination among available TAVR prediction scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Machine learning methods can generate robust models to predict in-hospital mortality for TAVR. The National Inpatient Sample TAVR score should be considered for prognosis and shared decision making in TAVR patients.

Comparison of Outcomes After Transcatheter vs Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement Among Patients at Intermediate Operative Risk With a History of Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery: A Post Hoc Analysis of the SURTAVI Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) has increased risk for patients with aortic stenosis (AS) and a history of coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) may be an alternative.

Objective

To compare TAVR with SAVR outcomes in patients at intermediate operative risk with prior CABG surgery.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this post hoc analysis of the Surgical Replacement and Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (SURTAVI) noninferiority randomized clinical trial, patients with severe, symptomatic AS at intermediate operative risk were enrolled from 87 centers across the United States, Europe, and Canada from June 2012 to June 2016 and followed-up with up to July 2017. Those with a history of CABG surgery were considered for analysis. Data were analyzed from September to December 2017.

Interventions

A total of 1746 patients were enrolled and randomized 1:1 to self-expanding TAVR or SAVR. An implant was attempted in 1660 patients, of whom 273 had prior CABG surgery, including 136 who underwent attempted TAVR and 137 who underwent attempted SAVR.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was all-cause mortality or disabling stroke at 1-year follow-up. Efficacy outcomes included quality of life, measured using the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire at 30 days, 6 months, and 1 year, and distance walked in 6 minutes, measured using the 6-minute walk test at 30 days and 1 year.

Results

Of the 136 patients in the TAVR cohort, 111 (81.6%) were male, and the mean (SD) age was 76.9 (6.5) years; of the 137 in the SAVR cohort, 117 (85.4%) were male, and the mean (SD) age was 76.6 (6.5) years. The mean (SD) Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality score was 5.0% (1.6%) in the TAVR cohort and 5.2% (1.7%) in the SAVR cohort. All-cause mortality or disabling stroke at 1-year follow-up was 8.9% (95% CI, 5.2-15.2) in the TAVR cohort and 6.7% (95% CI, 3.5-12.8) in the SAVR cohort (log-rank P = .53). Compared with patients receiving SAVR, the mean (SD) Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire summary score was significantly better among patients receiving TAVR at 30 days (81.4 [19.2] vs 69.7 [22.6]; P < .001); treatments were similar at 1 year (85.7 [14.6] vs 82.8 [18.4]; P = .19). Compared with patients in the SAVR cohort, those in the TAVR cohort showed greater mean (SD) improvement in distance walked at 1 year (48.3 [120.6] m vs 16.8 [88.7] m; P = .04).

Conclusions and Relevance

Both TAVR and SAVR were safe for intermediate-risk patients with AS and prior CABG surgery. The transcatheter approach facilitated faster improvement in quality of life and better exercise capacity at 1-year follow-up.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01586910.

Outcome of patients with previous coronary artery bypass grafting and severe calcific aortic stenosis receiving transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the impact of previous coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) on early safety at 30 days and 1-year mortality in patients receiving transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).

BACKGROUND

The use of TAVR in patients with previous CABG suffering from severe aortic stenosis has increased in the last years.

METHODS

Consecutive TAVR patients were stratified according to previous CABG versus no previous cardiac surgery (control). All-cause 1-year mortality and early safety at 30 days were evaluated.

RESULTS

In the unmatched cohort and compared to control (n = 2,364), CABG (n = 260) were younger, more often male and suffered more often from comorbidities leading to an increased STS-score (p < .001). The rate of early safety events at 30 days was comparable between CABG and control (21.2% vs. 24.6%, p = .22) with a higher mortality in CABG (9.6% vs. 5.3%, p = .005). All-cause 1-year mortality was higher in CABG compared to controls (HR 1.51 [95%-CI 1.15-1.97], p = .003). Applying Cox regression analysis, both 30-day (HR 1.57 [95%-CI 0.97-2.53], p = .067) and all-cause 1-year mortality (HR 1.24 [95%-CI 0.91-1.70], p = .174) were not significantly different between groups. After propensity-score matching, the rate of early safety events at 30 days was lower in CABG compared to controls (21.6% vs. 31.7%, p = .02). Thirty-day (9.1% vs. 7.7%, p = .596) and all-cause 1-year mortality (24.0% vs. 23.1%, p = .520, HR 1.14 [95%-CI 0.77-1.69], p = .520) were not different between groups.

CONCLUSION

In patients receiving TAVR, previous CABG was not associated with an increase in periprocedural complications and all-cause 1-year mortality when adjusted for other comorbidities.

Association of Acute Venous Thromboembolism With In-Hospital Outcomes of Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery

Background

While venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis is a strong recommendation after most surgeries, it is controversial in cardiac surgeries such as coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), because of perceived low VTE incidence and increased bleeding risk. Prior studies may not have been adequately powered to study outcomes of VTE in this population. We sought to investigate the postoperative incidence and outcomes of CABG patients using a large national inpatient database.

Methods and Results

We utilized the 2013 to 2014 National Inpatient Sample to identify all patients >18 years of age who underwent CABG (without concomitant valvular procedures), and had VTE during the hospital stay. We then compared clinically relevant outcomes in patients with and without VTE. We identified 331 950 CABG procedures. Of these, 1.3% (n=4205) had VTE. Patients with VTE were more likely to be older (mean 67.2±10.4 years versus 65.2±10.4 years, P<0.001). VTE was associated with higher incidence of inpatient mortality (6.8% versus 1.7%; adjusted odds ratio 1.92 [95% CI 1.40–2.65]; P<0.001) and complications. VTE was also associated with higher cost (mean±SE $81 995±$923 versus $48 909±$55) and longer length of stay (mean±SE 17.06±0.16 days versus 8.52±0.01 days).

Conclusions

Our analysis of >330 000 CABG procedures suggests that while postoperative VTE after CABG is rare, it is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Randomized controlled trials are needed to identify optimal strategies for VTE prophylaxis in these patients.

The Evolving Management of Aortic Valve Disease: 5-Year Trends in SAVR, TAVR, and Medical Therapy

Aortic stenosis (AS) and regurgitation (AR) may be treated with surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR), transcatheter AVR (TAVR), or medical therapy (MT). Data are lacking regarding the usage of SAVR, TAVR, and MT for patients hospitalized with aortic valve disease and the characteristics of the patients and hospitals associated with each therapy. From the Nationwide Readmissions Database, we determined utilization trends for SAVR, TAVR, and MT in patients with aortic valve disease admitted from 2012 to 2016 for valve replacement, heart failure, unstable angina, non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction, or syncope. We also performed multinomial logistic regressions to investigate associations between patient and hospital characteristics and treatment. Among 366,909 patients hospitalized for aortic valve disease, there was a 48.1% annual increase from 2012 through 2016. Overall, 19.9%, 6.7%, and 73.4% of patients received SAVR, TAVR, and MT, respectively. SAVR decreased from 21.9% in 2012 to 18.5% in 2016, whereas TAVR increased from 2.6% to 12.5%, and MT decreased from 75.5% to 69.0%. Older age, female sex, greater severity of illness, more admission diagnoses, not-for-profit hospitals, large hospitals, and urban teaching hospitals were associated with greater use of TAVR. In multivariable analysis, likelihood of TAVR relative to SAVR increased 4.57-fold (95% confidence interval 4.21 to 4.97). TAVR has increased at the expense of both SAVR and MT, a novel finding. However, this increase in TAVR was distributed inequitably, with certain patients more likely to receive TAVR certain hospitals more likely to provide TAVR. With the expected expansion of indications, inequitable access to TAVR must be addressed.

Management of Less-Than-Severe Aortic Stenosis During Coronary Bypass: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

The management of concomitant mild-to-moderate aortic stenosis (AS) at the time of coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) is controversial. Here we perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of CABG and aortic valve replacement (AVR) versus CABG alone in patients with mild-moderate AS.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE databases until July 2018 for studies comparing CABG & AVR versus CABG in patients with mild-moderate AS undergoing coronary bypass. Data were extracted by 2 independent investigators. The main outcomes were operative mortality, long-term survival, and reintervention for AS.

RESULTS

There were 6 unmatched retrospective observational studies with 1,172 patients (median follow-up 4.7 [interquartile range: 4.3 to 5.3] years). Patients undergoing CABG & AVR had less severe coronary artery disease. There were no differences in operative mortality (relative risk [RR]: 1.07; 95% CI, 0.59 to 1.94; P = 0.8). CABG & AVR was associated with greater incidence of stroke, bleeding, renal failure, and mediastinitis. At median follow-up of 5 years, there was no difference in long-term mortality (incidence rate ratio [IRR]:1.44; 95% CI, 0.83 to 2.51; P = 0.19), but CABG & AVR was associated with 73% lower risk of reoperation for AS (n = 13/485 versus n = 71/702; IRR: 0.27; 95% CI, 0.14 to 0.51; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients undergoing CABG with mild-moderate AS, combining AVR with CABG was associated with no difference in operative mortality but with increased risk of stroke, bleeding, renal failure, and mediastinitis. Long-term mortality was not different, but a risk of reoperation for AS at 5 years was 73% lower. Given the increasingly wide availability and safety of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), one may consider a conservative approach toward concomitant mild-moderate AS.

Conscious Sedation Versus General Anesthesia in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Cost and Outcome Analysis

Background

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has emerged as an alternative treatment for aortic stenosis in patients who are at moderate to high risk for surgical aortic valve replacement. The use of conscious sedation (CS) as compared with general anesthesia (GA) has shown better clinical outcomes for TAVR patients. Whether CS has any cost-benefit is still unknown. We analyze our local TAVR registry with a focus on the cost comparison between CS and GA for the TAVR population.

Methods

It is a retrospective chart review of 434 patients who received TAVR at our local center from December 2012 to April 2018. Patients who had their procedure aborted and those requiring a cardiopulmonary bypass or surgical conversion (16 patients) were excluded. The final sample size was 418. Patients were divided into two groups based on whether they received CS or GA. Primary outcomes were intensive care unit (ICU) hours, length of stay in hospital, readmission, or death at 30 days. The secondary outcome was the cost of TAVR admission. The cost was divided into direct and indirect costs. The student's T-test and chi-square tests were used for continuous and categorical variables, respectively. Adjusted logistic regression and multivariate analyses were run for primary and secondary outcomes.

Results

Of the 418 patients (age: 80.9±8.5, male: 52%) CS was given to 194 patients (46.4%) while GA was given in 224 patients(53.6%). The GA group had comparatively older age (81.8 vs. 80.0; p=0.03) and a higher average Society of Thoracic Surgery (STS) score (8.4 vs 5.7; p<0.001). Patients who received CS had a significantly shorter ICU stay (31.5 vs. 41.6 hours, p<0.001) and total days in the hospital (2.9 vs. 3.8 days, p=0.01). Readmission and mortality at 30 days were not different between the groups. There was no statistical difference in cost between the two groups ($72,809 vs. $71,497: p=0.656).

Conclusion

Using CS compared with GA improves morbidity for TAVR patients, in the form of ICU stay and the total length of stay in hospital. We did not find a significant difference in the cost of TAVR admission between CS and GA.

Comparison of Outcomes of Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients ≥80 Years of Age

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) procedures have increased exponentially since FDA approval in 2011. Older patients who underwent aortic valve replacement, either TAVI or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR), have elevated risk. Using the National Readmission Database, we included patients ≥80 years who underwent either TAVI or SAVR from 2011 to 2015. In-hospital outcomes of TAVI versus SAVR were compared using propensity-matched analysis to reduce the confounding effect of between-group imbalances. We identified a total of 30,590 TAVI and 54,204 SAVR procedures performed during the study period. The propensity score-matching algorithm yielded 19,713 patients in each group. The in-hospital mortality rates were significantly lower in TAVI compared with SAVR (3.4% vs 6.8%, p <0.001). Similarly, the 30-day readmission rate (15.2% vs 18.1% p = 0.001), in-hospital complications, mean length of stay (7 vs 12 days, p <0.001), and hospital cost (US$ 60,534 vs US$ 67,426) were significantly lower for TAVI patients. There was a significant increase in the use of TAVI (26 cased per month in 2011 to 1,237/month in 2015) and a decrease in SAVR (1,409/month in 2011 to 859/month in 2015) during the study period. In-patient mortality significantly decreased for patients who underwent TAVI (4.4% in 2011 to 2.5% in 2015) and did not significantly change for patients who underwent SAVR (5.0% in 2011 to 4.7% in 2015). Overall, the number of SAVR procedures remained two thirds higher than TAVI. In conclusion, in octo- and nonagenarians, TAVI is an effective and safer alternative to SAVR as it is associated with lower in-hospital mortality, lower major in-hospital complications, lower 30-day readmission rate, and hospital costs. Despite this, SAVR remained the most common approach in octogenarians, although the trends in this data set, suggest a shift in practice patterns for this cohort.

Association of peripheral artery disease with in-hospital outcomes after endovascular transcatheter aortic valve replacement

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of peripheral artery disease (PAD) and its association with in-hospital outcomes after endovascular transcatheter aortic valve replacement (EV-TAVR).

BACKGROUND

TAVR is an established treatment for patients at prohibitive, high, or intermediate surgical risk. PAD is a significant comorbidity in the determination of surgical risk. However, data on association of PAD with outcomes after EV-TAVR are limited.

METHODS

Patients in the National Inpatient Sample who underwent EV-TAVR between January 1, 2012 and September 30, 2015 were evaluated. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 51,685 patients underwent EV-TAVR during the study period. Of these, 12,740 (24.6%) had a coexisting diagnosis of PAD. The adjusted odds for in-hospital mortality [OR 1.08 (95% CI 0.83-1.41)], permanent pacemaker implantation [OR 0.98 (0.85-1.14)], conversion to open aortic valve replacement [OR 1.05 (0.49-2.26)], or acute myocardial infarction [OR 1.31(0.99-1.71)] were not different in patients with versus without PAD. However, patients with PAD had greater adjusted odds of vascular complications [OR 1.80 (1.50-2.16)], major bleeding [OR 1.20 (1.09-1.34)], acute kidney injury (AKI) [OR 1.19 (1.05-1.36)], cardiac complications [aOR 1.21 (1.01-1.44)], and stroke [OR 1.39(1.10-1.75)] compared with patients without PAD. Length of stay (LOS) was significantly longer for patients with PAD [7.23 (0.14) days vs. 7.11 (0.1) days, p < 0.001].

CONCLUSION

Of patients undergoing EV-TAVR, ~25% have coexisting PAD. PAD was not associated with increased risk of in-hospital mortality but was associated with higher risk of vascular complications, major bleeding, AKI, stroke, cardiac complications, and longer LOS.

Racial/Ethnic Disparities in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Insights from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project's National Inpatient Sample

PURPOSE

To identify racial/ethnic disparities in utilization rates, in-hospital outcomes and health care resource use among Non-Hispanic Whites (NHW), African Americans (AA) and Hispanics undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in the United States (US).

METHODS AND RESULTS

The National Inpatient Sample database was queried for patients ≥18 years of age who underwent TAVR from 2012 to 2014. The primary outcome was all-cause in hospital mortality. A total of 36,270 individuals were included in the study. The number of TAVR performed per million population increased in all study groups over the three years [38.8 to 103.8 (NHW); 9.1 to 26.4 (AA) and 9.4 to 18.2 (Hispanics)]. The overall in-hospital mortality was 4.2% for the entire cohort. Race/ethnicity showed no association with in-hospital mortality (P > .05). Though no significant difference were found between AA and NHW in any secondary outcome, being Hispanic was associated with higher incidence of acute myocardial infarction (aOR = 2.02; 95% CI, 1.06-3.85; P = .03), stroke/transient ischemic attack (aOR = 1.81; 95% CI, 1.04-3.14; P = .04), acute kidney injury (aOR = 1.65; 95% CI, 1.23-2.21; P < .01), prolonged length of stay (aOR = 1.18; 95% CI, 1.08-1.29; P < .01) and higher hospital costs (aOR = 1.27; 95% CI, 1.18-1.36; P < .01).

CONCLUSION

There are significant racial disparities in patients undergoing TAVR in the US. Though in-hospital mortality was not associated with race/ethnicity, Hispanic patients had less TAVR utilization, higher in-hospital complications, prolonged length of stay and increased hospital costs.

Aortic valve replacement via a right parasternal approach in a patient with a history of coronary artery bypass surgery and pericardiectomy: a case report

Background

The number of patients who require aortic valve replacement after coronary artery bypass grafting continues to increase. Re-operative cardiovascular surgery after coronary artery bypass grafting has various risk factors related to median re-sternotomy. It is particularly essential to avoid damage to the living graft. We successfully performed aortic valve replacement via right parasternal thoracotomy in a patient who had undergone coronary artery bypass grafting.

Case presentation

An 80-year-old man who had undergone coronary artery bypass grafting was referred to our hospital for syncope caused by severe aortic valve stenosis. He also had a history of pericardiotomy for constrictive pericarditis. His left internal thoracic artery bypass graft was patent. Aortic valve replacement was performed through a small right parasternal thoracotomy during cardiac arrest following cardiopulmonary bypass under moderate hypothermia and hyperkalemia by intermittent selective antegrade cardioplegia. His postoperative course was uneventful.

Conclusion

Aortic valve replacement via right parasternal thoracotomy with moderate hypothermia and hyperkalemia was safe and effective for avoidance of re-sternotomy-related complications.

Moderate Aortic Stenosis and Reduced Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction: Current Evidence and Challenges Ahead

Moderate aortic stenosis (AS) and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) constitute a clinical entity that has been proposed as a therapeutic target for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). It is defined by a mean trans-aortic gradient between 20 and 40 mmHg and an aortic valve area between 1.0 and 1.5 cm² in patients with LVEF < 50%. Retrospective data suggests a prevalence of 0.8% among patients referred for echocardiographic assessment. These patients are younger and show a higher frequency of previous myocardial infarction than those with severe AS randomized to TAVR in recent trials. In two retrospective studies including patients with moderate AS and reduced LVEF, a one-year mortality rate of 9 and 32% was reported, the latter in patients treated with medical therapy only during follow-up. Echocardiographic diagnosis of moderate AS poses challenges as current guidelines are directed to determine severe AS, and different presentations of moderate and mild AS have been generally neglected. Thus, the nomenclature would need to be revised and a description of possible scenarios is provided in this review. Dobutamine stress echocardiography and computed tomography are promising complementary tools. Likewise, a standardized clinical pathway is needed, in which a high level of suspicion and a low threshold for referral to a heart valve center is warranted. The Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement to UNload the Left ventricle in patients with Advanced heart failure (TAVR UNLOAD) trial (NCT02661451) is exploring whether TAVR would improve outcomes in patients receiving optimal heart failure therapy.