Cardiac conduction abnormalities in patients with degenerated bioprostheses undergoing transcatheter aortic valve-in-valve implantations and their impact on long-term outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The relationship between preoperative cardiac conduction abnormalities (CCA) and long-term outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve-in-valve implantation (TAVI-VIV) remains unclear. The aim of the study was to evaluate the effects of preoperative CCA on mortality and morbidity after TAVI-VIV and to estimate the impact of new-onset CCA on postoperative outcomes. METHODS: Between 2011 and 2020, 201 patients with degenerated aortic bioprostheses were qualified for TAVI-VIV procedures in two German heart centers. Cases with previously implanted permanent rhythm-controlling devices were excluded (n = 53). A total of 148 subjects met the eligibility criteria and were divided into 2 study groups according to the presence of preexisting CCA (CCA (n = 84) and non-CCA (n = 64), respectively). Early and late mortality and morbidity were evaluated. Follow-up functional status was assessed according to New York Heart Association (NYHA) classification. RESULTS: There were no procedural deaths. TAVI-VIV related new-onset CCAs were observed in 35.8% patients. The 30-day permanent pacemaker implantation rate was 1.6% in non-CCA vs 9.5% in CCA group (p = 0.045). Preexisting right bundle-branch block (OR:5.01; 95%CI, 1.05-23.84) and first-degree atrioventricular block (OR:4.55; 95%CI, 1.10-18.73) were independent predictors of new pacemaker implantation. One-year and five-year probability of survival were comparable in CCA and non-CCA groups: 90.3% vs 91.8% and 68.2% vs 74.3%, respectively. Surviving patients with preexisting and new-onset CCA had a worse functional status according to NYHA classification at follow-up. CONCLUSION: Preexisting and new-onset postoperative CCAs did not affect early and late mortality after TAVI-VIV procedures, however, they may have a negative impact on late functional status.

Impact of preinterventional tricuspid regurgitation on outcome of MitraClip therapy in patients with severely reduced ejection fraction.

Aim: To evaluate the impact of preinterventional moderate-to-severe functional tricuspid regurgitation (FTR) on early outcome after percutaneous edge-to-edge mitral valve repair (pMVR) with MitraClip procedures for functional mitral regurgitation (FMR) in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Methods and results: From January 2013 to December 2017, 80 patients with HFrEF (ejection fraction 22%±5.3%) and FMR (grade 3.0±0.36) underwent successful pMVR. The 3-year actuarial survival was 58%. However, 73% (n=22) of non-survivors died of cardiac failure within 1 year. Patients were categorised into none-to-mild (n=36) and moderate-to-severe (n=44) postinterventional FTR groups according to pre-MitraClip tricuspid regurgitation grade. Cox regression analysis on 1-year survival demonstrated an impact of FTR severity (HR=1.8, 95% CI 1.01% to 3.09%, p=0.047), preoperative New York Heart Association class (HR=2.8, 95% CI 1.2% to 6.5%, p=0.015) and peripheral artery disease (HR=5.4, 95% CI 1.6 to 18, p=0.0054). Kaplan-Meier analysis showed that 1-year cardiac death was higher in the moderate-to-severe FTR group (p=0.048). In our study, 77% of pre-MitraClip moderate-to-severe FTR cannot be significantly reduced. Post-MitraClip moderate-to-severe FTR grade was related to lower survival (p<0.001). Conclusion: In patients with HFrEF treated with MitraClip for FMR, moderate-to-severe FTR was an independent predictor of cardiac death within 1 year. To improve survival, additional therapy to residual FTR should be considered in early phase after MitraClip therapy.

Femoral transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation as alternative strategy for failed aortic bioprostheses: A single-centre experience with long-term follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Surgical reoperation is still a standard procedure performed for degenerated aortic bioprostheses. On the other hand femoral minimally invasive valve-in-valve implantation (femTAVI-VIV) is an intriguing alternative. This clinical study was design to compare the early and late outcomes of redo-surgery (Redo-AVR) and femTAVI-VIV procedures for failed aortic bioprostheses. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 108 patients with degenerated aortic bioprostheses qualified for isolated Redo-AVR (n = 40) or femTAVI-VIV (n = 68) between 2003 and 2018. Both cohorts were divided into intermediate and high-risk groups according to the EuroSCORE II (4-9% and >9%). Propensity score matching selected 20 pairs in Intermediate-risk group and 10 pairs in High-risk group for the final comparison. RESULTS: Patients qualified for femTAVI-VIV were older (79.2 vs 72.9 years, p < 0.001) and at higher risk (EuroSCORE II 10.9 vs 7.8%, p = 0.005) than Redo-AVR subjects. Overall survival in femTAVI-VIV and Redo-AVR was comparable at 30-days, 1- and 5-years, respectively (92.6% vs 92.5%, 85.2% vs 85.0% and 62.9% vs 72.5%, p = 0.287). After PSM no differences in mortality, myocardial infarction, pacemaker implantation, stroke or acute renal insufficiency were found. Transcatheter procedure was associated with shorter hospital stay, lower rate of blood products transfusions and higher incidence of mild paravalvular leaks. CONCLUSION: Our study supports the opinion that transcatheter approach for treatment of patients with degenerated aortic bioprostheses is a safe alternative to Redo-AVR procedures particularly for those at high-risk.