Safety of transcatheter aortic valve implantation in a hospital with visiting on-site cardiac surgery.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the feasibility and safety of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with a visiting on-site cardiac surgery program for surgical back-up. BACKGROUND: Both European and American guidelines recommend institutional cardiac surgery back-up for TAVI. However, the conversion to cardiac surgery is very rare, many complications of TAVI can be managed by catheter techniques and a visiting team can also provide surgical stand-by. Therefore, the need for institutional cardiac surgery (by a surgeon who routinely performs conventional surgical valve replacement at the institution performing TAVI) has been questioned. METHODS: A retrospective review of consecutive TAVI cases with visiting on-site cardiac surgery was performed. Key demographic, echocardiographic, and procedural data were collected prospectively. RESULTS: A total of 97 patients (81.9 ± 6.3 years) with high-risk criteria (log Euroscore 21.6 ± 14.4, chronic renal failure 39.2%, severe systolic dysfunction 24.7%) underwent TAVI with visiting on-site cardiac surgery at our institution. Local anesthesia with or without conscious sedation was used in 94.8% of patients. Procedural technical success was 100%, with 2 episodes of tamponade (both treated with pericardiocentesis) and a 16.5% vascular complication rate (all treated conservatively or percutaneously). Thirty-day mortality was 3.1%, with 5.2% rate of stroke and 8.2% rate of major bleeding. There were no conversions to surgery. CONCLUSIONS: TAVI can be done safely in the setting of a hospital with visiting on-site cardiac surgery. This requires careful patient selection, experienced operators and surgeons in experienced centers with well-established criteria and processes of care. In this setting, it may be an option for hospitals without institutional cardiac surgery.

The STS score is the strongest predictor of long-term survival following transcatheter aortic valve implantation, whereas access route (transapical versus transfemoral) has no predictive value beyond the periprocedural phase.

OBJECTIVES: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) was developed as a promising new therapy for inoperable and surgical high-risk patients as an alternative to traditional aortic valve replacement. After a successful procedure, prognosis may mainly be determined by comorbidities. However, no appropriate risk score to predict long-term outcome following TAVI is currently available. The aim of this study was to identify predictors of adverse short- and long-term outcomes. METHODS: This is a two-centre registry study including a total of 426 TAVI procedures (274 transfemoral [TF] and 152 transapical [TA]) performed at the University Hospital and CardioVascular Center of Frankfurt (Germany) between 2005 and 2011. RESULTS: Observed 30-day mortality was 4.8% among TF and 12.6% among TA patients (hazard ratio [HR] TF vs TA was 0.38; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.19-0.77). Patients with a higher Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score experienced a 6% elevation in the 30-day mortality per point (HR 1.06; 95% CI 1.03-1.10), whereas the predictive value of the logistic EuroSCORE (HR 1.03; 95% CI 1.01-1.05) and EuroSCORE 2 (HR 1.04; 95% CI 1.01-1.07) was slightly lower. Most interestingly, older age (>80 years) and the access type were predictors of 30-day mortality. However, the only independent predictor of long-term mortality in a 30-day landmark analysis was the STS score (HR 1.05; 95% CI 1.02-1.09). CONCLUSIONS: The STS score outperforms the logistic EuroSCORE in predicting adverse outcomes following TAVI. The transapical approach is associated with higher perioperative mortality, but does not exert any influence on long-term prognosis beyond the periprocedural phase.