Midterm Outcomes After Aortic Valve Neocuspidization (Ozaki Procedure) in Adults.

BACKGROUND: Trileaflet aortic valve neocuspidization (AVN) using autologous pericardium (Ozaki procedure) is an emerging surgical treatment option for aortic valve diseases. Although excellent results have been reported from Japan, data pertaining to its use in the United States are sparse. METHODS: All adult patients who underwent AVN (AVN group) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) with a bioprosthetic valve (SAVR group) between 2015 and 2022 were identified. Propensity score matching was used to adjust the baseline characteristics between the 2 groups. RESULTS: A total of 101 patients underwent AVN, and 1816 patients underwent SAVR with a bioprosthetic valve. None in the AVN group required conversion to SAVR. Before matching, mean age in the AVN group was 68.5 ± 8.8 years, and 56 patients (55.4%) underwent concomitant procedures. Preoperatively, 3 (3%) had endocarditis. Bicuspid valve was observed in 38 (38.4%). None died at 30 days in the AVN group. The median follow-up duration was 3.2 years. After propensity score matching, the expected survival and freedom from at least moderate aortic regurgitation at 5 years was 91.7% ± 3.1% and 97.6% ± 1.7%, respectively. Propensity score matching yielded 77 patients in each group. The Kaplan-Meier curve demonstrated equivalent survival at 5 years between the 2 groups (P = .95). Additionally, freedom from at least moderate aortic regurgitation was comparable at 5 years (P = .23). CONCLUSIONS: AVN can be safely performed for a variety of aortic valve diseases, with or without concomitant operations. AVN demonstrated similar midterm outcomes compared with SAVR with a bioprosthetic valve in the United States adult population.

ECMO and Impella Support Strategies as a Bridge to Surgical Repair of Post-Infarction Ventricular Septal Rupture.

Background and Objectives: Post-infarct ventricular septal rupture (PIVSR) continues to have significant morbidity and mortality, despite decreased prevalence. Impella and venoarterial extracorporeal membranous oxygenation (VA-ECMO) have been proposed as strategies to correct hemodynamic derangements and bridge patients to delayed operative repair when success rates are higher. This review places VA-ECMO and Impella support strategies in the context of bridging patients to successful PIVSR repair, with an additional case report of successful bridging with the Impella device. Materials and Methods: We report a case of PIVSR repair utilizing 14 days of Impella support. We additionally conducted a systematic review of contemporary literature to describe the application of VA-ECMO and Impella devices in the pre-operative period prior to surgical PIVSR correction. Expert commentary on the advantages and disadvantages of each of these techniques is provided. Results: We identified 19 studies with 72 patients undergoing VA-ECMO as a bridge to PIVSR repair and 6 studies with 11 patients utilizing an Impella device as a bridge to PIVSR repair. Overall, outcomes in both groups were better than expected from patients who were historically managed with medicine and balloon pump therapy, however there was a significant heterogeneity between studies. Impella provided for excellent left ventricular unloading, but did result in some concerns for reversal of shunting. VA-ECMO resulted in improved end-organ perfusion, but carried increased risks of device-related complications and requirement for additional ventricular unloading. Conclusions: Patients presenting with PIVSR in cardiogenic shock requiring a MCS bridge to definitive surgical repair continue to pose a challenge to the multidisciplinary cardiovascular team as the diverse presentation and management issues require individualized care plans. Both VA-ECMO and the Impella family of devices play a role in the contemporary management of PIVSR and offer distinct advantages and disadvantages depending on the clinical scenario. The limited case numbers reported demonstrate feasibility, safety, and recommendations for optimal management.

Nonusefulness of Antithrombotic Therapy After Surgical Bioprosthetic Aortic Valve Replacement.

Controversy persists regarding the advisability of anticoagulation for the early period after biological surgical aortic valve replacement (AVR). We aim to examine the impact of various antithrombotic regimens on outcomes in a large cohort of biological AVR patients. Records of 1,111 consecutive adult patients who underwent surgical biological AVR at our institution between 2013 and 2017 were reviewed. Outcomes included stroke, bleeding, and death at 3 and 12 months. Treatment regimens included (1) no therapy, (2) anticoagulants (warfarin or Factor Xa inhibitors), (2) antiplateles (various), and (4) anticoagulants + antiplatelets. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to track outcomes, and Cox-proportional hazards regression models were conducted to analyze effects of different therapies on adverse events. At 3 months, thromboembolic events were low and not significantly different between the no therapy group (2.2%) and anticoagulation (2.8%) or anticoagulation + antiplatelet (3.6%) or all groups (3.7%). The antiplatelet group was just significantly lower, at 2.2%. However, this was driven by non-stroke cardiovascular events in patients with coronary artery disease. The incidence of death at 3 months was low and not significantly different between all groups. At 12 months, there were no thromboembolic benefits between groups, but bleeding events were significantly higher in the anticoagulation group (no therapy (1.4%), anticoagulation (8.4%), antiplatelet (4.5%), anticoagulation + antiplatelet (7.9%)). In conclusion, none of the antithrombotic regimens showed benefits in stroke or survival at 3 or 12 months after biological AVR. Anticoagulation increased bleeding events. Routine anticoagulation after biological AVR appears to be unnecessary and potentially harmful.

Fate of preserved bicuspid valves at time of ascending aortic aneurysmectomy.

BACKGROUND: The fate of the spared bicuspid aortic valve in patients undergoing ascending aortic aneurysm surgery is relatively unknown. Our institutional policy has been to replace all aortic valves with significant abnormalities, as evidenced by intraoperative transesophageal echocardiography or direct visual inspection. In this study, we elaborate our experience regarding the long-term fate of preserved bicuspid aortic valves after ascending aortic aneurysm extirpation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 2000 to 2018, 407 consecutive ascending aortic aneurysm patients with concomitant bicuspid aortic valves underwent surgery by a single surgeon at our institution. Among these, 23 (5.65%) patients did not have their valve replaced, forming the study group. Postoperative and preoperative echocardiograms were compared to determine changes in valve function. RESULTS: Follow-up was complete in 100% of patients. The average time between preoperative and postoperative echocardiograms was 4.50 ± 4.09 years (0.19-15.63). Aortic stenosis or regurgitation changed from none to mild in 5 (21.7%) of patients, with an average echocardiographic interval follow-up of 3.08 years, and from none to severe in 2 (8.7%), with an interval of 11.7 years. One patient required reoperation, including aortic valve replacement, during follow-up. CONCLUSION: Bicuspid aortic valves free of aortic stenosis or insufficiency before surgery and "healthy" appearing at surgery can safely be preserved.

Symptoms Matter: A Symptomatic but Radiographically Elusive Ascending Aortic Dissection.

Symptoms attributable to a thoracic aortic aneurysm (TAA) are a separate indication for prophylactic repair, irrespective of aortic size. We present the case of a 56-year-old female with a history of a thoracic ascending aortic aneurysm (TAAA) and four other heart and arch vessel abnormalities who presented to us with chest pain radiating to her back. Computed Tomography and echocardiography showed no evidence of a dissection and revealed a maximal ascending aortic diameter of 4.2 cm. The patient subsequently underwent root-sparing ascending aortic and hemiarch replacement due to her threatening symptomatology. A focal dissection was discovered intraoperatively, resembling a similar case previously reported by our team.

Antithrombotic Therapy after Bioprosthetic Aortic Valve Replacement: A Therapeutic Morass.

Valvular heart disease is a common pathologic condition that affects 6 million people in the United States and more than 100 million worldwide. The most common valvular disorder is aortic stenosis. Current American and European guidelines recommend surgical management for symptomatic aortic stenosis with low risk of perioperative complications and endovascular intervention for high-risk patients with multiple comorbidities. Considering the increasing volume of aortic valve replacement (AVR) with biological valves, it is very important to select the appropriate anticoagulant after surgical AVR. In this article, we review the impact of anticoagulation on immediate and remote complications after AVR.