The effect of an acute aspirin challenge on intestinal permeability in healthy adults with and without prophylactic probiotic consumption: a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Healthy individuals may experience increases in intestinal permeability after chronic or acute use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, which may be attenuated by probiotics. This study investigates the effects of an acute aspirin challenge on gastroduodenal barrier function with or without prophylactic probiotic consumption. METHODS: Twenty-nine generally healthy participants (26 ± 6 years) completed a 14-week randomized, double-blind, crossover trial. A probiotic containing 2 Lactobacilli strains or placebo was administered for 3 weeks, with a 4-week washout period between crossover phases. Daily and weekly questionnaires assessing gastrointestinal function were completed for 2 weeks before until 2 weeks after each intervention to assess gastrointestinal function. Gastroduodenal permeability was assessed by urinary excretion of orally administered sucrose after 1, 2, and 3 weeks of each intervention with a 1950 mg-aspirin challenge after 2 weeks of supplementation. Stool samples were collected weekly during supplementation for detection of species of interest. RESULTS: Gastroduodenal permeability increased with aspirin challenge (Week 1: 3.4 ± 0.6 µmol vs Week 2: 9.9 ± 1.0 µmol urinary sucrose; p < 0.05). There were no differences in the change in permeability after the aspirin challenge or gastrointestinal function between interventions. CONCLUSION: The acute aspirin challenge significantly increased intestinal permeability similarly in both groups, and prophylactic probiotic consumption was unable to prevent the loss in this particular model.

A Comparison of Thirty-Day Clinical and Echocardiographic Outcomes of Patients Undergoing Transcatheter vs. Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement for Native Aortic Insufficiency.

OBJECTIVES: We aim to compare in-hospital and 30-day outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) versus surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for native aortic insufficiency (AI). BACKGROUND: TAVR is increasingly used off-label in patients with AI deemed high risk for SAVR. There is a paucity of data comparing TAVR and SAVR with current commercially available TAVR devices. METHODS: A single-center, retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing TAVR or SAVR for native AI between 2014 and 2020 was performed. Data were obtained from the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) Adult Cardiac Surgery Database, Transcatheter Valve Therapy (TVT) registry, and chart review. In-hospital and 30-day outcomes are reported. RESULTS: Of 125 total patients, 91 underwent SAVR and 34 underwent TAVR. The TAVR group had a higher STS predictive risk of mortality (PROM) (TAVR = 3.96 %, SAVR = 1.25 %, p < 0.0001). In the postoperative period, the SAVR group had higher rates of new-onset atrial fibrillation (20.9 % vs. 0 %, p < 0.001), while the TAVR group had higher rates of complete heart block requiring permanent pacemaker implantation (20.6 % vs. 2.2 %, p < 0.001). There was no difference in in-hospital or 30-day mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction, residual AI, or repeat valve intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Despite higher STS PROM and more comorbidities, patients who underwent TAVR for AI had similar in-hospital and 30-day outcomes as patients who underwent SAVR for AI. These results support TAVR in selected high-risk patients with AI, with the knowledge that pacemaker needs may be higher than patients undergoing SAVR.

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.