Impact of reintervention after index aortic valve replacement on the risk of subsequent mortality.

Objectives: The use of bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement (AVR) is inherently associated with a risk of structural valve degeneration (SVD) and the need for aortic valve (AV) reintervention. We sought to evaluate whether AV reintervention, in the form of repeat surgical AVR (SAVR) or valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve replacement (ViV-TAVR), negatively affects patients' subsequent long-term survival after index SAVR. Methods: We identified patients who had undergone bioprosthetic SAVR from 2002 to 2017 at our institution. Median longitudinal follow-up after index SAVR was 7.3 years (10.9 years for those with and 7.2 years for those without AV reintervention), and median follow-up after AV reintervention was 1.9 years. Cox regression analyses using AV reintervention (re-SAVR and ViV-TAVR) as a time-varying covariate were used to determine the impact of reintervention on subsequent survival. Results: Of 4167 patients who underwent index SAVR, 139 (3.3%) required AV reintervention for SVD, with re-SAVR being performed in 65 and ViV-TAVR in 74. Median age at the index SAVR was 73 years (interquartile range, 64-79 years), and 2541 (61%) were male. Overall, there were total of 1171 mortalities observed, of which 13 occurred after re-SAVR and 9 after ViV-TAVR. AV reintervention was associated with a greater risk of subsequent mortality compared with those patients who did not require AV reintervention (hazard ratio, 2.53; 95% confidence interval, 1.64-3.88, P < .001). This increased risk of subsequent mortality was more pronounced for those who received their index AVR when <65 years of age (hazard ratio, 5.60; 95% confidence interval, 2.57-12.22, P < .001) versus those ≥65 years (2.06, 1.21-3.52, P = .008). Direct comparison of survival between those who underwent re-SAVR versus ViV-TAVR showed 5-year survival to be comparable (re-SAVR: 74% vs ViV-TAVR: 80%, P = .67). Conclusions: Among patients receiving bioprosthetic AVR, an AV reintervention for SVD is associated with an increased risk of subsequent mortality, regardless of re-SAVR or ViV-TAVR, and this risk is greater among younger patients. These findings should be balanced with individual preferences at index AVR in the context of patients' lifetime management of aortic stenosis.

Orifice Areas of Balloon-Expandable Transcatheter Heart Valves: A Three-Dimensional Transesophageal Echocardiographic Study.

BACKGROUND: Accurate expected effective orifice area (EOA) values for balloon-expandable (BE) transcatheter heart valves (THV) are crucial for preventing patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM) and assessment of THV function. Currently published reference EOAs, however, are based on transthoracic echocardiography (TTE), which may be subject to left ventricular outflow tract diameter underestimation and/or suboptimal THV Doppler interrogation. The objective of this study was to establish reference EOA values for BE THVs on the basis of Doppler and three-dimensional (3D) transesophageal echocardiography (TEE). METHODS: Two hundred twelve intraprocedural transesophageal echocardiographic examinations performed during BE THV implantation with optimal postimplantation Doppler and 3D imaging were retrospectively reviewed. Continuity equation-derived EOAs were compared with geometric orifice areas by 3D planimetry (GOA3D). Performance indices (i.e., EOA normalized to valve size) and PPM rates were determined. TTE-based EOAs obtained within 30 days were also calculated in a subset of 170 patients. RESULTS: The average EOA for all BE THV valves (77% SAPIEN 3) was 2.3 ± 0.5 cm2, while the average EOA was 1.6 ± 0.2 cm2 for 20-mm, 2.0 ± 0.2 cm2, for 23-mm, 2.5 ± 0.3 cm2 for 26-mm, and 3.0 ± 0.3 cm2 for 29-mm THV size (P < .001). Bland-Altman analysis demonstrated very good agreement between EOA and GOA3D (bias -0.04 ± 0.15 cm2). There were strong correlations between annular area and TEE-based EOA (R = 0.84) and GOA3D (R = 0.87). The mean performance index was 47 ± 5% and was similar for all THV sizes (P = .21). EOAs based on TTE were smaller compared with those based on TEE, while the correlation with annular area (R = 0.67) and agreement with GOA3D (bias -0.26 ± 0.43 cm2) was not as strong. The overall PPM rate was 2% in the TEE cohort and 12% in the TTE cohort. CONCLUSIONS: EOAs for BE THVs based on intraprocedural Doppler and 3D TEE suggest that previously published TTE-based reference values for EOA are underestimated, while PPM rates may be overestimated. Our findings have important clinical implications for preimplantation decision-making and for the evaluation of THV hemodynamics and function during follow-up.

Atrial fibrillation post central retinal artery occlusion: Role of implantable loop recorders.

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the risk of subclinical atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients with central retinal artery occlusion (CRAO) compared to those with cryptogenic stroke using implantable loop recorders (ILR). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of 273 consecutive patients who had ILRs inserted at our institution for either cryptogenic stroke (n = 227) or CRAO (n = 46). Our primary endpoint was a time to event analysis for the new diagnosis of AF by ILR. Univariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazard models were used to determine the predictors of time-to-AF. RESULTS: A total of 64 patients were found to have newly diagnosed AF by remote monitoring of the ILR. AF was detected in 57 of 227 (25%) cryptogenic stroke patients by the end of a maximum 5.1 years follow-up and in seven of 46 (15%) CRAO patients by the end of a maximum 3.6 years follow-up (P = .215, log-rank test). The Kaplan-Meier estimates for freedom from AF was 59.4% for CRAO and 66.6% for cryptogenic stroke (P = NS, log-rank test). Baseline variables predicting AF included older patients, higher CHADS2 VASC score, longer PR interval on initial EKG evaluation, and mitral annular calcification on transthoracic echocardiogram. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with CRAO are at risk for subclinical AF, similar to those with cryptogenic stroke. Long-term monitoring to detect AF may lead to changes in pharmacotherapy to reduce the risk for subsequent stroke.

Anti-coagulant and anti-platelet therapy in the COVID-19 patient: a best practices quality initiative across a large health system.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic due to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has challenged health-care systems and physicians worldwide to attempt to provide the best care to their patients with an evolving understanding of this unique pathogen. This disease and its worldwide impact have sparked tremendous interest in the epidemiology, pathogenesis, and clinical consequences of COVID-19. This accumulating body of evidence has centered around case series and often empiric therapies as controlled trials are just getting underway. What is clear is that patients appear to be at higher risk for thrombotic disease states including acute coronary syndrome (ACS), venous thromboembolism (VTE) such as deep vein thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism (PE), or stroke. Patients with underlying cardiovascular disease are also at higher risk for morbidity and mortality if infected. These patients are commonly treated with anticoagulation and/or antiplatelet medications and less commonly thrombolysis during hospitalization, potentially with great benefit but the management of these medications can be difficult in potentially critically ill patients. In an effort to align practice patterns across a large health system (Jefferson Health 2,622 staffed inpatient beds and 319 intensive care unit (ICU) beds across 14 facilities), a task force was assembled to address the utilization of anti-thrombotic and anti-platelet therapy in COVID-19 positive or suspected patients. The task force incorporated experts in Cardiology, Vascular Medicine, Hematology, Vascular Surgery, Pharmacy, and Vascular Neurology. Current guidelines, consensus documents, and policy documents from specialty organizations were used to formulate health system recommendations. OBJECTIVE: Our goal is to provide guidance to the utilization of antithrombotic and antiplatelet therapies in patients with known or suspected COVID-19.

Clinical implications of LDH isoenzymes in hemolysis and continuous-flow left ventricular assist device-induced thrombosis.

Pump-induced thrombosis continues to be a major complication of continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices (CF-LVADs), which increases the risks of thromboembolic stroke, peripheral thromboembolism, reduced pump flow, pump failure, cardiogenic shock, and death. This is confounded by the fact that there is currently no direct measure for a proper diagnosis during pump support. Given the severity of this complication and its required treatment, the ability to accurately differentiate CF-LVAD pump thrombosis from other complications is vital. Hemolysis measured by elevated lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) enzyme levels, when there is clinical suspicion of pump-induced thrombosis, is currently accepted as an important metric used by clinicians for diagnosis; however, LDH is a relatively nonspecific finding. LDH exists as five isoenzymes in the body, each with a unique tissue distribution. CF-LVAD pump thrombosis has been associated with elevated serum LDH-1 and LDH-2, as well as decreased LDH-4 and LDH-5. Herein, we review the various isoenzymes of LDH and their utility in differentiating hemolysis seen in CF-LVAD pump thrombosis from other physiologic and pathologic conditions as reported in the literature.

Editor's Choice-Prospective registry of cardiac critical illness in a modern tertiary care Cardiac Intensive Care Unit.

BACKGROUND: The changing landscape of care in the Cardiac Intensive Care Unit (CICU) has prompted efforts to redesign the structure and organization of advanced CICUs. Few studies have quantitatively characterized current demographics, diagnoses, and outcomes in the contemporary CICU. METHODS: We evaluated patients in a prospective observational database, created to support quality improvement and clinical care redesign in an AHA Level 1 (advanced) CICU at Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. All consecutive patients (N=2193) admitted from 1 January 2015 to 31 December 2017 were included at the time of admission to the CICU. RESULTS: The median age was 65 years (43% >70 years) and 44% of patients were women. Non-cardiovascular comorbidities were common, including chronic kidney disease (27%), pulmonary disease (22%), and active cancer (13%). Only 7% of CICU admissions were primarily for an acute coronary syndrome, which was the seventh most common individual diagnosis. The top three reasons for admission to the CICU were shock/hypotension (26%), cardiopulmonary arrest (11%), or primary arrhythmia without arrest (9%). Respiratory failure was a primary or major secondary reason for triage to the CICU in 17%. In-hospital mortality was 17.6%. CONCLUSIONS: In a tertiary, academic, advanced CICU, patients are elderly with a high burden of non-cardiovascular comorbid conditions. Care has shifted from ACS toward predominantly shock and cardiac arrest, as well as non-ischemic conditions, and the mortality of these conditions is high. These data may be useful to guide cardiac critical care redesign.

Impact of Antithrombotic Regimen on Mortality, Ischemic, and Bleeding Outcomes after Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.

INTRODUCTION: Optimal antithrombotic therapy after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) remains unclear. We evaluated the association between antithrombotic regimens and outcomes in TAVR patients. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed consecutive patients who underwent TAVR at a single academic center from April 2009 to March 2014. Antithrombotic regimens were classified as single or dual antiplatelet therapy (AP), single antiplatelet plus anticoagulant (SAC), or triple therapy (TT). The primary endpoint was a composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and major bleeding. Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) were obtained with best subset variable selection methods using bootstrap resampling. RESULTS: Of 246 patients who underwent TAVR, 241 were eligible for analysis with 133, 88, and 20 patients in the AP, SAC, and TT groups, respectively. During a median 2.1-year follow-up, 53.5% had at least one endpoint-the most common was death (68%), followed by major bleeding (23%), stroke (6%), and MI (3%). At 2 years, the composite outcome occurred in 70% of TT, 42% of SAC, and 31% of AP patients. Compared to AP, adjusted HRs for the composite outcome were 2.88 [95% Confidence intervals (CI) (1.61-5.16); p = 0.0004] and 1.66 (95% CI [1.13-2.42]; p = 0.009) in the TT and SAC groups, respectively. Mortality rates at 2 years were 61% in the TT, 32% in the SAC, and 26% in the AP groups (p = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: The risk of the composite outcome of death, MI, stroke, or major bleeding at 2-year follow-up was significantly higher in TAVR patients treated with TT or SAC versus AP, even after multivariate adjustment.