Determination of the Fear of COVID-19 and the Quality of Life of Patients With Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implants During the Pandemic.

This study aimed to determine the fear of COVID-19 and the quality of life of patients with transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) during the pandemic. This descriptive cross-sectional study included 132 TAVI patients. Data were collected using a patient information form, the Fear of COVID-19 Scale (FCV-19S), and the EuroQol-5 Dimension (EQ-5D). The mean FCV-19S score of the patients was 17.37 ± 6.12. The mean EQ-5D index score was 0.56 ± 0.37 and the mean VAS score was 65.5 ± 11.5. As per the dimensions of the EQ-5D index, 75% of the patients had mobility problems. According to the logistic regression analysis results, mobility was the most affected parameter, as demonstrated by the worsening in symptoms during the pandemic (odds ratio: 7.370, 95% CI [2.183, 24.881]). The patients with TAVI had a moderate level of fear associated with COVID-19, and the pandemic negatively affected their quality of life.

'Valve for Life': tackling the deficit in transcatheter treatment of heart valve disease in the UK.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a proven treatment for life-threatening aortic valve disease, predominantly severe aortic stenosis. However, even among developed nations, access to TAVI is not uniform. The Valve for Life initiative was launched by the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions in 2015 with the objective of improving access to transcatheter valve interventions across Europe. The UK has been identified as a country with low penetration of these procedures and has been selected as the fourth nation to be included in the initiative. Specifically, the number of TAVI procedures carried out in the UK is significantly lower than almost all other European nations. Furthermore, there is substantial geographical inequity in access to TAVI within the UK. As a consequence of this underprovision, waiting times for TAVI are long, and mortality among those waiting intervention is significant. This article reviews these issues, reports new data on access to TAVI in the UK and presents the proposals of the UK Valve for Life team to address the current problems in association with the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society.

Expert position statements: comparison of recommendations for the care of adults and youth with elevated lipoprotein(a).

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Summarize recent recommendations on clinical management of adults and youth with elevated lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] who are at-risk of or affected by cardiovascular disease (CVD). RECENT FINDINGS: There is ample evidence to support elevated Lp(a) levels, present in approximately 20% of the general population, as a causal, independent risk factor for CVD and its role as a significant risk enhancer. Several guidelines and position statements have been published to assist in the identification, treatment and follow-up of adults with elevated levels of Lp(a). There is growing interest in Lp(a) screening and strategies to improve health behaviors starting in youth, although published recommendations for this population are limited. In addition to the well established increased risk of myocardial infarction, stroke and valvular aortic stenosis, data from the coronavirus pandemic suggest adults with elevated Lp(a) may have a particularly high-risk of cardiovascular complications. Lp(a)-specific-lowering therapies are currently in development. Despite their inability to lower Lp(a), use of statins have been shown to improve outcomes in primary and secondary prevention. SUMMARY: Considerable differences exist amongst published guidelines for adults on the use of Lp(a) in clinical practice, and recommendations for youth are limited. With increasing knowledge of Lp(a)'s role in CVD, including recent observations of COVID-19-related risk of cardiovascular complications, more harmonized and comprehensive guidelines for Lp(a) in clinical practice are required. This will facilitate clinical decision-making and help define best practices for identification and management of elevated Lp(a) in adults and youth.

Safety of same-day discharge after uncomplicated, minimalist transcatheter aortic valve replacement in the COVID-19 era.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to evaluate the safety, efficacy and feasibility of same-day discharge after uncomplicated, minimalist TAVR. BACKGROUND: At the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, we created a same-day discharge (SDD) pathway after conscious sedation, transfemoral (minimalist) TAVR to help minimize risk of viral transmission and conserve hospital resources. Studies support that next-day discharge (NDD) for carefully selected patients following minimalist TAVR is safe and feasible. There is a paucity of data regarding the safety of SDD after TAVR. METHODS: In-hospital and 30 day outcomes of consecutive patients meeting pre-specified criteria for SDD after minimalist TAVR at our institution between March and July of 2020 were reviewed. Outcomes were compared to a NDD cohort from July 2018 through July 2020 that would have met SDD criteria. Primary endpoints were mortality, delayed pacemaker placement, stroke and cardiovascular readmission at 30 days. RESULTS: Twenty nine patients were discharged via the SDD pathway after TAVR. 128 prior NDD patients were identified who met all criteria for SDD. The STS scores were similar between the two groups (SDD 2.6% ±1.5 vs. NDD 2.3% ± 1.2). There were no deaths at 30 days in either group. There was no significant difference in delayed pacemaker placement (SDD 0% vs. NDD 0.8%, p > .99) or cardiovascular readmission (SDD 0% vs. NDD 5.5%, p = .35) at 30 days. CONCLUSIONS: Same day discharge following uncomplicated, minimalist TAVR in selected patients appears to be safe, achieving similar 30 day outcomes as a cohort of next day discharge patients.

Safety and Operational Efficiency of Restructuring and Redeploying a Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Service During the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Oxford Experience.

BACKGROUND: The risk of nosocomial COVID-19 infection for vulnerable aortic stenosis patients and intensive care resource utilization has led to cardiac surgery deferral. Untreated severe symptomatic aortic stenosis has a dismal prognosis. TAVR offers an attractive alternative to surgery as it is not reliant on intensive care resources. We set out to explore the safety and operational efficiency of restructuring a TAVR service and redeploying it to a new non-surgical site during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: The institutional prospective service database was retrospectively interrogated for the first 50 consecutive elective TAVR cases prior to and after our institution's operational adaptations for the COVID-19 pandemic. Our endpoints were VARC-2 defined procedural complications, 30-day mortality or re-admission and service efficiency metrics. RESULTS: The profile of patients undergoing TAVR during the pandemic was similar to patients undergoing TAVR prior to the pandemic with the exception of a lower mean age (79 vs 82 years, p < 0.01) and median EuroScore II (3.1% vs 4.6%, p = 0.01). The service restructuring and redeployment contributed to the pandemic-mandated operational efficiency with a reduction in the distribution of pre-admission hospital visits (3 vs 3 visits, p < 0.001) and the time taken from TAVR clinic to procedure (26 vs 77 days, p < 0.0001) when compared to the pre-COVID-19 service. No statistically significant difference was noted in peri-procedural complications and 30-day outcomes, while post-operative length of stay was significantly reduced (2 vs 3 days, p < 0.0001) when compared to pre-COVID-19 practice. CONCLUSIONS: TAVR service restructuring and redeployment to align with pandemic-mandated healthcare resource rationalization is safe and feasible.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation versus surgical aortic valve replacement during the COVID-19 pandemic-Current practice and concerns.

COVID-19 has had a dramatic impact on the provision of healthcare. COVID-19 can manifest with cardiac and thrombotic presentations. Additionally, patients with cardiovascular comorbidities are at an increased risk of adverse outcomes related to COVID-19 infection. This in turn has led to a significant reduction in the provision of cardiac surgery with alternative management options utilized to address patients with significant disease. In terms of aortic valve disease, transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) provides advantages over surgical aortic valve replacement in with a lower burden on healthcare resources. COVID-19 also resulted in changes in management strategies and as such TAVI is now being considered in younger- and low-risk patients. However, long term data with regard to TAVI is still unknown, and the use in patient groups that have been excluded in the large pivotal studies that established TAVI as an alternative to surgery has raised specific concerns in the use of TAVI as the preferred treatment choice. With the long term ramification unknown, it is essential that decisions are made with caution.

An unexplained death after routine cardiac surgery: how long have we dealt with coronavirus disease 2019?

We present a case report of fatal respiratory failure after cardiac surgery in the early stages of the coronavirus disease 2019 outbreak. Although not supported by epidemiological data nor clinical course, coronavirus disease 2019 infection was revealed post-mortem by immunohistochemical detection of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 spike protein in lung tissue.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement during the COVID-19 pandemic-A Dutch single-center analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has put an enormous strain on healthcare systems and intensive care unit (ICU) capacity, leading to suspension of most elective procedures, including transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). However, deferment of TAVR is associated with significant wait-time mortality in patients with severe aortic valve stenosis. Conversely, there is currently no data available regarding the safety and feasibility of a continued TAVR program during this unprecedented crisis. The aim of this study is to evaluate the safety and feasibility of patients undergoing TAVR during the COVID-19 pandemic in our center, with specific emphasis on COVID-19 related outcomes. METHODS: All patients who underwent TAVR in our center between February 27, 2020, and June 30, 2020, were evaluated. Clinical outcomes were described in terms of Valve Academic Research Consortium 2 definitions. Patient follow-up was done by chart review and telephone survey. RESULTS: A total of 71 patients have undergone TAVR during the study period. Median age was 80 years, 63% were men, and 25% were inpatients. Procedural success was 99%. After TAVR, 30% involved admission to the ICU, and 94% were ultimately discharged to the cardiac care unit on the same day. Two patients (3%) had confirmed COVID-19 a few days after TAVR, and both died of COVID-19 pneumonia within 2 weeks after hospital discharge. CONCLUSIONS: A continued TAVR program during the COVID-19 pandemic is feasible despite limited hospital resources. However, COVID-19 related mortality after TAVR is of concern.