OBJECTIVES
The aim of this study was to evaluate early- and mid-term outcome and aortic remodelling in patients undergoing implantation of 2 different frozen elephant trunk prostheses, either the Thoraflex™ hybrid (Vascutek, Inchinnan, UK) and the E-vita Open (Jotec Inc., Hechingen, Germany) for acute aortic dissection.
METHODS
All consecutive patients [n = 88; median age 59 (49–67) years; 69% male] undergoing surgery with a frozen elephant trunk prosthesis for acute aortic dissection from August 2005 until March 2018 were included in this study. The Thoraflex™ device was implanted in 55 patients and the E-vita Open graft in 33 patients.
RESULTS
Preoperative characteristics did not differ significantly between groups. There was also no statistically significant difference in postoperative outcome: in-hospital mortality (11% vs 12%; P > 0.99), stroke (18% vs 6%; P = 0.12) and spinal cord injury (6% vs 6%; P > 0.99). While there was no statistically significant difference in the occurrence of distal stent graft-induced new entries (16% vs 18%; P = 0.77), there was a significantly higher rate of secondary endovascular aortic interventions in the Thoraflex™ hybrid group (22% vs 0%; P = 0.003). There was a trend towards a higher rate of false lumen thrombosis at the level of the stent graft (74% vs 95%; P = 0.085) and was comparable at the thoraco-abdominal transition (53% vs 80%; P = 0.36) 1 year after implantation of the prostheses.
CONCLUSIONS
In this comparison of 2 frozen elephant trunk prostheses, there is no evidence that different surgical techniques influence in-hospital outcome. At 1-year follow-up, patients who underwent implantation of the E-vita Open prosthesis showed a significantly reduced rate of secondary aortic interventions and a trend towards a higher rate of false lumen thrombosis which might be attributed to a longer coverage of the descending aorta due to a longer stent graft design and significantly more frequent implantation in zone 3.
Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has replaced surgical aortic valve replacement as the new gold standard in elderly patients with severe aortic valve stenosis. However, alongside this novel approach, new complications emerged that require swift diagnosis and adequate management. Vascular access marks the first step in a TAVR procedure. There are several possible access sites available for TAVR, including the transfemoral approach as well as transaxillary/subclavian, transcarotid, transapical, and transcaval. Most cases are primarily performed through a transfemoral approach, while other access routes are mainly conducted in patients not suitable for transfemoral TAVR. As vascular access is achieved primarily by large bore sheaths, vascular complications are one of the major concerns during TAVR. With rising numbers of TAVR being performed, the focus on prevention and successful management of vascular complications will be of paramount importance to lower morbidity and mortality of the procedures. Herein, we aimed to review the most common vascular complications associated with TAVR and summarize their diagnosis, management, and prevention of vascular complications in TAVR.
Aims
Transcatheter mitral valve implantation (TMVI) is a new treatment option for patients with symptomatic mitral valve (MV) disease. Real‐world data have not yet been reported. This study aimed to assess procedural and 30‐day outcomes of TMVI in a real‐world patient cohort.
Method and results
All consecutive patients undergoing implantation of a transapically delivered self‐expanding valve at 26 European centres from January 2020 to April 2021 were included in this retrospective observational registry. Among 108 surgical high‐risk patients included (43% female, mean age 75 ± 7 years, mean STS‐PROM 7.2 ± 5.3%), 25% was treated for an off‐label indication (e.g. previous MV intervention or surgery, mitral stenosis, mitral annular calcification). Patients were highly symptomatic (New York Heart Association [NYHA] functional class III/IV in 86%) and mitral regurgitation (MR) was graded 3+/4+ in 95% (38% primary, 37% secondary, and 25% mixed aetiology). Technical success rate was 96%, and MR reduction to ≤1+ was achieved in all patients with successful implantation. There were two procedural deaths and 30‐day all‐cause mortality was 12%. At early clinical follow‐up, MR reduction was sustained and there were significant reductions of pulmonary pressure (systolic pulmonary artery pressure 52 vs. 42 mmHg, p < 0.001), and tricuspid regurgitation severity (p = 0.013). Heart failure symptoms improved significantly (73% in NYHA class I/II, p < 0.001). Procedural success rate according to MVARC criteria was 80% and was not different in patients treated for an off‐label indication (74% vs. 81% for off‐ vs. on‐label, p = 0.41).
Conclusion
In a real‐world patient population, TMVI has a high technical and procedural success rate with efficient and durable MR reduction and symptomatic improvement.
This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.