Between 2014 and 2016, the need for ECS remained stable around 0.7%. Left ventricular guidewire perforation and annular rupture were the most frequent causes, accounting for almost half of ECS cases. Half of the patients could be salvaged by ECS-nevertheless, 1 year of all-cause mortality was high even in those ECS patients surviving the in-hospital period.

Orthotopic branched endovascular aortic arch repair using the Bolton Relay Plus double-branch endoprosthesis is a safe and feasible technique enriching the armamentarium to treat patients with thoracic aortic disease who cannot undergo classical surgery. Aortic-related survival is excellent, and the occurrence of disabling stroke and endoleaks warranting treatment is low. Further studies are needed to assess the long-term durability of this new method.

This study demonstrated that persistent new-onset LBBB was associated with increased mortality in patients undergoing TAVI. Compared with the Edwards SAPIEN valve, implantation of the Medtronic CoreValve resulted in a higher rate of both persistent new-onset LBBB and PM but not death.

Background— Transapical transcatheter aortic valve implantation is generally perceived to be associated with increased morbidity compared with transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation. We aimed to compare access-related complications and survival using propensity score matching. Methods and Results— Prospective, single-center registry of 1000 consecutive patients undergoing transapical and transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation between May 2008 and April 2012. Transapical was performed in 413 patients and transfemoral in 587 patients. Patients with transapical access were less often women and less had pulmonary hypertension. Further they had more peripheral arterial disease, coronary artery disease, carotid stenosis, and recurrent surgery and a higher logistic EuroSCORE I (24.3%±16.2% for transapical versus 22.2%±16.2% for transfemoral; P <0.01). After building 2 propensity score–matched groups of 354 patients each with either access route (total 708 patients), baseline characteristics were comparable. In this analysis, there was no significant difference in 30 day mortality (5.9% transapical versus 8.5% transfemoral; P =0.19), the rate of myocardial infarction (2.5% transapical versus 2.0% transfemoral; P =0.61), stroke (2.0% transapical versus 2.3% transfemoral; P =0.79), bleeding complications, pacemaker implantation rates, or moderate aortic insufficiency. Stage 1 renal complications were more common in transapical patients (odds ratio, 2.81; 95% confidence interval, 1.93–4.09), whereas major vascular complications were less common (odds ratio, 0.14; 95% confidence interval, 0.06–0.29). Survival probability over the long term was not statistically different (hazard ratio, 0.89; 95% confidence interval, 0.72–1.10; log-rank Test, P =0.27). Conclusions— The data demonstrate that in an experienced multidisciplinary heart team, either access route can be performed with comparable results.