BackgroundReal-world evidence supporting the reproducibility and superiority of valve repair over replacement in active mitral valve infective endocarditis is lacking.MethodsData from a prospective... Show moreBackgroundReal-world evidence supporting the reproducibility and superiority of valve repair over replacement in active mitral valve infective endocarditis is lacking.MethodsData from a prospective nationwide database, including all cardiac surgical procedures in The Netherlands, were used. Adult patients undergoing primary mitral valve intervention who had a diagnosis of active infective endocarditis and who underwent surgery between 2013 and 2020 were included. Survival analysis was performed for the whole follow-up period as well as after applying the landmark of 90 days.ResultsOf 715 patients who met the inclusion criteria, 294 (41.1%) underwent valve repair. Mitral valve repair rates decreased slightly over the course of the study. The early mortality rate was 13.0%, and a trend of steadily declining early mortality rates over the course of the study, despite a steady increase in patient complexity, was observed. On risk-adjusted analysis, mitral valve replacement demonstrated inferior results when compared with valve repair (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.216; 95% CI, 1.425-3.448; P < .001), even after a landmark analysis was performed (adjusted hazard ratio 2.489; 95% CI, 1.124-5.516; P = .025). These results were confirmed by a propensity score–adjusted analysis (adjusted hazard ratio 2.251; 95% CI, 1.029-4.21; P = .042).ConclusionsContemporary trends in mitral valve surgery for active infective endocarditis suggest growing patient complexity but slightly declining early mortality rates. A trend of decreasing mitral valve repair rates was seen. The results of this study suggest improved late outcomes of valve repair compared with valve replacement. Show less
OBJECTIVESAortic valve repair procedures are technically challenging, and current intraoperative evaluation methods often fail to predict the final echocardiographic result. We have developed a... Show moreOBJECTIVESAortic valve repair procedures are technically challenging, and current intraoperative evaluation methods often fail to predict the final echocardiographic result. We have developed a novel intraoperative aortic valve visualization and pressurization (AVP) device, enabling valve inspection under physiological conditions, and measuring aortic valve insufficiency (AI) during cardioplegic arrest.METHODSThe AVP device is attached to the (neo)aorta, after any type of aortic valve repair, while the heart is arrested. The root is pressurized (60–80 mmHg) using a saline solution and an endoscope is introduced. The valve is inspected, and the amount of valvular leakage is measured. Postoperative ‘gold standard’ transesophageal echocardiogram measurements of AI are performed and compared against regurgitation volume measured.RESULTSIn 24 patients undergoing valve-sparing root replacement, the AVP device was used. In 22 patients, postoperative echocardiographic AI was ≤ grade 1. The median leakage was 90 ml/min, IQR 60–120 ml/min. In 3 patients, additional adjustments after visual inspection was performed. In 2 patients, with complex anatomy, the valve was replaced. In one, after evaluation with the device, there was undesirable result visually and residual AI of 330 ml/min, and in another, 260 ml/min residual AI was measured and valve restriction on visual inspection.CONCLUSIONSThe novel AVP device enables intraoperative evaluation of the valve under physiological conditions, while still on arrested heart, and allows for targeted adjustments. The AVP device can be an important aid for intraoperative evaluation of the aortic valve, during valve repair and valve-sparing procedures, thereby making the operative result more predictable and the operation more efficient. Show less
BackgroundINTELLiVENT–Adaptive Support Ventilation (ASV) is a closed–loop ventilation mode that uses capnography to adjust tidal volume (VT) and respiratory rate according to a user–set end–tidal... Show moreBackgroundINTELLiVENT–Adaptive Support Ventilation (ASV) is a closed–loop ventilation mode that uses capnography to adjust tidal volume (VT) and respiratory rate according to a user–set end–tidal CO2 (etCO2) target range. We compared sidestream versus mainstream capnography with this ventilation mode with respect to the quality of breathing in patients after cardiac surgery.Methods Single–center, single–blinded, non–inferiority, randomized clinical trial in adult patients scheduled for elective cardiac surgery that were expected to receive at least two hours of postoperative ventilation in the ICU. Patients were randomized 1:1 to closed–loop ventilation with sidestream or mainstream capnography. Each breath was classified into a zone based on the measured VT, maximum airway pressure, etCO2 and pulse oximetry. The primary outcome was the proportion of breaths spent in a predefined ‘optimal’ zone of ventilation during the first three hours of postoperative ventilation, with a non–inferiority margin for the difference in the proportions set at –20%. Secondary endpoints included the proportion of breaths in predefined ‘acceptable’ and ‘critical’ zones of ventilation, and the proportion of breaths with hypoxemia.Results Of 80 randomized subjects, 78 were included in the intention–to–treat analysis. We could not confirm the non–inferiority of closed–loop ventilation using sidestream with respect to the proportion of breaths in the ‘optimal’ zone (mean ratio 0.87 [0.77 to ∞]; P = 0.116 for non–inferiority). The proportion of breaths with hypoxemia was higher in the sidestream capnography group versus the mainstream capnography group.Conclusions We could not confirm that INTELLiVENT–ASV using sidestream capnography is non–inferior to INTELLiVENT–ASV using mainstream capnography with respect to the quality of breathing in subjects receiving postoperative ventilation after cardiac surgery. Show less
BackgroundImplantation of a bioprosthetic valve is a reasonable choice for patients aged > 65 years. For middle-aged patients there is less certainty about whether a mechanical or bioprosthetic... Show moreBackgroundImplantation of a bioprosthetic valve is a reasonable choice for patients aged > 65 years. For middle-aged patients there is less certainty about whether a mechanical or bioprosthetic valve is best.MethodsThe Pericardial Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement (PERIGON) Pivotal Trial is evaluating the safety and efficacy of the Avalus bioprosthesis (Medtronic). We evaluated clinical and echocardiographic outcomes through 5 years of follow-up, stratified by age ≤ 65 and >65 years.ResultsTwo hundred seventy-one patients (24.2%) were ≤65 years old and 847 (75.8%) >65 years old. Most patients in both groups were men (217 [80.1%] vs 623 [73.6%], respectively; P = .031). Younger patients had a lower Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk of mortality (1.1% ± 0.9% vs 2.2% ± 1.4%, P < .001), better baseline New York Heart Association class (P = .004), and fewer comorbidities than older patients. At 5 years mortality was lower among younger than older patients (5.3% vs 14.0%, P < .001) and no cases of structural valve deterioration occurred in either group. Effective orifice area was similar between age groups (P = .11), and mean gradient was 13.9 ± 5.4 vs 12.0 ± 4.1 mm Hg (P < .001). Multivariable linear regression identified several parameters associated with mean aortic gradient at 5 years, including baseline age and mean aortic gradient, discharge stroke volume index and EOA, and implanted valve size. Ninety-five percent of patients were in New York Heart Association class I/II through 5 years in both age groups (P = .85).ConclusionsFindings from this analysis demonstrate satisfactory safety, hemodynamic performance, and durability of the Avalus bioprosthesis through a 5-year follow-up in patients aged ≤ 65 and >65 years. Show less
BackgroundPatients with a bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) have an increased risk to develop aortic complications. Many studies are pointing towards a possible embryonic explanation for the development... Show moreBackgroundPatients with a bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) have an increased risk to develop aortic complications. Many studies are pointing towards a possible embryonic explanation for the development of both a bicuspid aortic valve as well as a defective ascending aortic wall in these patients. The fetal and newborn ascending aortic wall has however scarcely been studied in bicuspid aortic valve patients. We hypothesize that early histopathological defects might already be visible in the fetal and pediatric ascending aortic wall of bicuspid aortic valve patients, indicating at an early embryonic defect.MethodsNon-dilated BAV ascending aortic wall samples were collected (n = 40), categorized in five age groups: premature (age range 17.5 weeks + days GA till 37.6 weeks + days GA) 2. neonate (age range 1 – 21 days) 3. infant (age range 1 month – 4 years) 4. adolescent (age range 12 years – 15 years) and 5. adult (age range 41 – 72 years). Specimen were studied for intimal and medial histopathological features.ResultsThe premature ascending aortic wall has a significantly thicker intimal and significantly thinner medial layer as compared to all other age categories (p < 0.05). After birth the intimal thickness decreases significantly. The medial layer increases in thickness before adulthood (p < 0.05) with an increasing number of elastic lamellae (p < 0.01) and interlamellar mucoid extracellular matrix accumulation (p < 0.0001). Intimal atherosclerosis was scarce and medial histopathological features such as overall medial degeneration, smooth muscle cell nuclei loss and elastic fiber fragmentation were not appreciated in the BAV ascending aortic wall of any age.ConclusionsThe main characteristics of a bicuspid ascending aortic wall are already present before adulthood, albeit not before birth. Considering the early manifestations of ascending aortic wall pathology in bicuspid aortic valve patients, the pediatric population should be considered while searching for markers predictive for future aortopathy. Show less
IntroductionBicuspid aortic valve (BAV) patients have an increased risk to develop thoracic aortic complications. Little is known about the prevalence and severity of atherosclerosis in the BAV... Show moreIntroductionBicuspid aortic valve (BAV) patients have an increased risk to develop thoracic aortic complications. Little is known about the prevalence and severity of atherosclerosis in the BAV ascending aortic wall. This study evaluates and compares the prevalence of thoracic aortic atherosclerosis in BAV and tricuspid aortic valve (TAV) patients.MethodsAtherosclerosis was objectified using three diagnostic modalities in two separate BAV patient cohorts (with and without an aortic dilatation). Within the first group, atherosclerosis was graded histopathologically according to the modified AHA classification scheme proposed by Virmani et al. In the second group, the calcific load of the ascending aorta and coronary arteries, coronary angiographies and cardiovascular risk factors were studied. Patients were selected from a surgical database (treated between 2006-2020), resulting in a total of 128 inclusions.ResultsHistopathology showed atherosclerotic lesions to be more prevalent and severe in all TAV as compared to all BAV patients (OR 1.49 (95%CI 1.14 - 1.94); p = 0.003). Computed tomography showed no significant differences in ascending aortic wall calcification between all BAV and all TAV patients, although a tendency of lower calcific load in favor of BAV was seen. Coronary calcification was higher in all TAV as compared to all BAV (OR 1.30 (95%CI 1.06 - 1.61); p = 0.014).ConclusionAscending aortic atherosclerotic plaques were histologically more pronounced in TAV as compared to the BAV patients, while CT scans revealed equal amounts of calcific depositions within the ascending aortic wall. This study confirms less atherosclerosis in the ascending aortic wall and coronary arteries of BAV patients as compared to TAV patients. These results were not affected by the presence of a thoracic aortic aneurysm. Show less
BACKGROUND The effect of an "aggressive" approach on the aortic root in acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD) remains insufficiently explored. METHODS Retrospective analysis was conducted between... Show moreBACKGROUND The effect of an "aggressive" approach on the aortic root in acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD) remains insufficiently explored. METHODS Retrospective analysis was conducted between 1992 and 2020 of a single-center, prospective cohort of consecutive patients aged double dagger 18 years diagnosed with ATAAD. Patients were divided into 2 groups: aortic root replacement (ARR; prosthetic or valve-sparing root replacement, n = 141) and conservative root approach (CRA; root sparing of partially dissected root, n = 90; and supracoronary ascending replacement in nondissected root, n = 68). Inverse probability weighting was used to compare patients with different preoperative characteristics. Mean follow-up was 5.1 (0-21) years in ARR and 7.1 (0-25) years in CRA. RESULTS The frequency of ARR increased over the years, with 19% and 78% of patients undergoing ARR in the earliest and most recent periods, respectively. Early mortality decreased over the years, despite a more aggressive approach, and remained lower in ARR. CRA was associated with a higher hazard of late mortality (hazard ratio, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.12-1.68; P = .001) and reintervention (hazard ratio, 2.08; 95% CI, 1.44-3.56; P = .001). After CRA, new-onset aortic valve insufficiency was a common cause of reintervention. CONCLUSIONS Over the years, there was a gradual increase in the root replacement approach in ATAAD. Root replacement was associated with better long-term survival and fewer reinterventions compared with the conservative approach, whereas the in-hospital mortality decreased during these years. Hence, aggressive root replacement is safe and may be applied in ATAAD with good long-term clinical results, without increased hospital mortality.(Ann Thorac Surg 2023;115:1396-402)(c) 2023 by The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Show less
Background: Patients with mitral regurgitation (MR) commonly suffer from left atrial (LA) remodeling. LA fibrosis is considered to be a key player in the LA remodeling process, as observed in... Show moreBackground: Patients with mitral regurgitation (MR) commonly suffer from left atrial (LA) remodeling. LA fibrosis is considered to be a key player in the LA remodeling process, as observed in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients. Literature on the presence and extent of LA fibrosis in MR patients however, is scarce and its clinical implications remain unknown. Therefore, the ALIVE trial was designed to investigate the presence of LA remodeling including LA fibrosis in MR patients prior to and after mitral valve repair (MVR) surgery. Methods: The ALIVE trial is a single center, prospective pilot study investigating LA fibrosis in patients suffering from MR in the absence of AF (identifier NCT05345730). In total, 20 participants will undergo a CMR scan including 3D late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) imaging 2 week prior to MVR surgery and at 3 months follow-up. The primary objective of the ALIVE trial is to assess the extent and geometric distribution of LA fibrosis in MR patients and to determine effects of MVR surgery on reversed atrial remodelling. Implications: This study will provide novel insights into the pathophysiological mechanism of fibrotic and volumetric atrial (reversed) remodeling in MR patients undergoing MVR surgery. Our results may contribute to improved clinical decision making and patient-specific treatment strategies in patients suffering from MR. Show less
Background: Patients with mitral regurgitation (MR) commonly suffer from left atrial (LA) remodeling. LA fibrosis is considered to be a key player in the LA remodeling process, as observed in... Show moreBackground: Patients with mitral regurgitation (MR) commonly suffer from left atrial (LA) remodeling. LA fibrosis is considered to be a key player in the LA remodeling process, as observed in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients. Literature on the presence and extent of LA fibrosis in MR patients however, is scarce and its clinical implications remain unknown. Therefore, the ALIVE trial was designed to investigate the presence of LA remodeling including LA fibrosis in MR patients prior to and after mitral valve repair (MVR) surgery.Methods: The ALIVE trial is a single center, prospective pilot study investigating LA fibrosis in patients suffering from MR in the absence of AF (identifier NCT05345730). In total, 20 participants will undergo a CMR scan including 3D late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) imaging 2 week prior to MVR surgery and at 3 months follow-up. The primary objective of the ALIVE trial is to assess the extent and geometric distribution of LA fibrosis in MR patients and to determine effects of MVR surgery on reversed atrial remodelling.Implications: This study will provide novel insights into the pathophysiological mechanism of fibrotic and volumetric atrial (reversed) remodeling in MR patients undergoing MVR surgery. Our results may contribute to improved clinical decision making and patient-specific treatment strategies in patients suffering from MR. Show less
Paassen, J. van; Graaf-Dijkstra, A. de; Brunsveld-Reinders, A.H.; Jonge, E. de; Klautz, R.J.M.; Tsonaka, R.; ... ; Arbous, M.S. 2023
OBJECTIONS: Development of acute lung injury after cardiac surgery is associated with an unfavourable outcome. Acute respiratory distress syndrome in general is, besides cytokine and interleukin... Show moreOBJECTIONS: Development of acute lung injury after cardiac surgery is associated with an unfavourable outcome. Acute respiratory distress syndrome in general is, besides cytokine and interleukin activation, associated with activation of platelets, monocytes and neutrophils. In relation to pulmonary outcome after cardiac surgery, leucocyte and platelet activation is described in animal studies only. Therefore, we explored the perioperative time course of platelet and leucocyte activation in cardiac surgery and related these findings to acute lung injury assessed via PaO2/FiO(2) (P/F) ratio measurements. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was performed, including 80 cardiac surgery patients. At five time points, blood samples were directly assessed by flow cytometry. For time course analyses in low (< 200) versus high (>200) P/F ratio groups, repeated measurement techniques with linear mixed models were used. RESULTS: Already before the start of the operation, platelet activatability (P = 0.003 for thrombin receptor-activator peptide and P = 0.017 for adenosine diphosphate) was higher, and the expression of neutrophil activation markers was lower (CD18/CD11; P = 0.001, CD62L; P = 0.013) in the low P/F group. After correction for these baseline differences, the peri- and postoperative thrombin receptor-activator peptide-induced thrombocyte activatability was decreased in the low P/F ratio group (P = 0.008), and a changed pattern of neutrophil activation markers was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Prior to surgery, an upregulated inflammatory state with higher platelet activatability and indications for higher neutrophil turnover were demonstrated in cardiac surgery patients who developed lung injury. It is difficult to distinguish whether these factors are mediators or are also aetiologically related to the development of lung injury after cardiac surgery. Further research is warranted. Show less
Tomsic, A.; Klautz, R.J.M.; Borger, M.A.; Palmen, M. 2023
Surgical mitral valve repair, performed either through median sternotomy or minimal invasive approach, presents the gold standard treatment for degenerative mitral valve disease. In dedicated... Show moreSurgical mitral valve repair, performed either through median sternotomy or minimal invasive approach, presents the gold standard treatment for degenerative mitral valve disease. In dedicated centres, high repair and low complication rates have been established with excellent valve repair durability. Recently, new techniques have been introduced, that allow mitral valve repair to be performed through small surgical incisions and while avoiding cardio-pulmonary bypass. These new techniques, however, conceptually differ significantly when compared to surgical repair and it remains questionable whether they are capable of reproducing the results of surgical treatment. Show less
Objective: To describe differences between North America and Europe in the perioperative management of patients undergoing surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). Methods: Patients with moderate... Show moreObjective: To describe differences between North America and Europe in the perioperative management of patients undergoing surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). Methods: Patients with moderate or greater aortic stenosis or regurgitation requiring SAVR were enrolled in a prospective observational cohort evaluating the safety and efficacy of a new stented bioprosthesis at 25 centres in North America (Canada and the USA) and 13 centres in Europe (Germany, the Netherlands, France, the UK, Switzerland and Italy). While all patients underwent implantation with the same bioprosthetic model, perioperative management was left to the discretion of participating centres. Perioperative care was described in detail including outcomes up to 1-year follow-up. Results: Among 1118 patients, 643 (58%) were implanted in North America, and 475 (42%) were implanted in Europe. Patients in Europe were older, had a lower body mass index, less bicuspid disease and worse degree of aortic stenosis at baseline. In Europe, anticoagulant therapy at discharge was more aggressive, whereas length of stay was longer, and discharges directly to home were less common. Rehospitalisation risk was lower in Europe at 30 days (8.5% vs 15.9%) but converged at 1-year follow-up (26.5% vs 28.1%). Within continents, there were major differences between individual countries concerning perioperative management. Conclusion: Contemporary perioperative management of SAVR patients varies between North America and Europe in patient selection, procedural techniques, antithrombotic regimen and discharge management. Furthermore, rehospitalisation differed largely between continents and countries. Hence, geographical setting must be considered during design and interpretation of trials on SAVR. Show less
Arabkhani, B.; Klautz, R.J.M.; Heer, F. de; Kerchove, L. de; Khoury, G. el; Lansac, E.; ... ; Brakel, T.J. van 2023
OBJECTIVES: Our goal was to evaluate the outcome of valve-sparing root replacement (VSRR) and to compare the outcomes to those of patients having composite valve-graft conduit aortic root... Show moreOBJECTIVES: Our goal was to evaluate the outcome of valve-sparing root replacement (VSRR) and to compare the outcomes to those of patients having composite valve-graft conduit aortic root replacement (CVG-ARR) in a cohort of patients with aortic root aneurysm & PLUSMN; valve insufficiency, without valvular stenosis. Although valve-sparing procedures are preferable in young patients, there is a lack of comparative data in comparable patients. METHODS: The VSRR procedures were performed in 2005 patients, and 218 patients underwent a CVG-ARR procedure. Exclusion criteria included aortic dissection, endocarditis and valvular stenosis. Propensity score matching (3:1 ratio) was applied to compare VSRR (reimplantation 33% and remodelling 67%) and CVG-ARR. RESULTS: We matched 218 patients with CVG-ARR to 654 patients with VSRR (median age, 56.0; median follow-up was 4 years in both groups; interquartile range 1-5 years). Early mortality was 1.1% of those who had VSRR versus 2.3% in those who had CVG-ARR. Survival was 95.4% [95% confidence interval (CI) 94-97%] at 5 years in patients who had VSRR versus 85.4% (95% CI 82-92%) in those who had CVG-ARR; P = 0.002. Freedom from reintervention at 5 years was 96.8% (95% CI 95-98%) with VSRR and 95.4% (95% CI 91-99%) with CVG-ARR (P = 0.98). Additionally, there were more thromboembolic, endocarditis and bleeding events in the patients who had CVG-ARR (P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: This multicentre study shows excellent results after valve-sparing root replacement in patients with an ascending aortic aneurysm with or without valve insufficiency. Compared to composite valve-graft aortic root replacement, survival is better and valve-related events are fewer. Consequently, valve-sparing procedures should be considered whenever a durable repair is feasible. We advocate a valve-sparing strategy even in more complex cases when performed in experienced centres. Show less
Arabkhani, B.; Klautz, R.J.M.; Heer, F. de; Kerchove, L. de; Khoury, G. el; Lansac, E.; ... ; Brakel, T.J. van 2023
OBJECTIVESOur goal was to evaluate the outcome of valve-sparing root replacement (VSRR) and to compare the outcomes to those of patients having composite valve–graft conduit aortic root replacement... Show moreOBJECTIVESOur goal was to evaluate the outcome of valve-sparing root replacement (VSRR) and to compare the outcomes to those of patients having composite valve–graft conduit aortic root replacement (CVG-ARR) in a cohort of patients with aortic root aneurysm ± valve insufficiency, without valvular stenosis. Although valve-sparing procedures are preferable in young patients, there is a lack of comparative data in comparable patients.METHODSThe VSRR procedures were performed in 2005 patients, and 218 patients underwent a CVG-ARR procedure. Exclusion criteria included aortic dissection, endocarditis and valvular stenosis. Propensity score matching (3:1 ratio) was applied to compare VSRR (reimplantation 33% and remodelling 67%) and CVG-ARR.RESULTSWe matched 218 patients with CVG-ARR to 654 patients with VSRR (median age, 56.0; median follow-up was 4 years in both groups; interquartile range 1–5 years). Early mortality was 1.1% of those who had VSRR versus 2.3% in those who had CVG-ARR. Survival was 95.4% [95% confidence interval (CI) 94–97%] at 5 years in patients who had VSRR versus 85.4% (95% CI 82–92%) in those who had CVG-ARR; P = 0.002. Freedom from reintervention at 5 years was 96.8% (95% CI 95–98%) with VSRR and 95.4% (95% CI 91–99%) with CVG-ARR (P = 0.98). Additionally, there were more thromboembolic, endocarditis and bleeding events in the patients who had CVG-ARR (P = 0.02).CONCLUSIONSThis multicentre study shows excellent results after valve-sparing root replacement in patients with an ascending aortic aneurysm with or without valve insufficiency. Compared to composite valve-graft aortic root replacement, survival is better and valve-related events are fewer. Consequently, valve-sparing procedures should be considered whenever a durable repair is feasible. We advocate a valve-sparing strategy even in more complex cases when performed in experienced centres. Show less
Objective: The objective of this study was to compare short-and midterm clinical and echocardiographic outcomes according to the use of pledgeted sutures during aortic valve replacement. Methods:... Show moreObjective: The objective of this study was to compare short-and midterm clinical and echocardiographic outcomes according to the use of pledgeted sutures during aortic valve replacement. Methods: Patients with aortic stenosis or regurgitation requiring aortic valve replacement were enrolled in a prospective cohort study to evaluate the safety of a new stented bioprosthesis. Outcomes were analyzed according to the use of pledgets (pledgeted group) or no pledgets (nonpledgeted group). The primary outcome was a composite of thromboembolism, endocarditis, and major paravalvular leak at 5 years of follow-up. Secondary outcomes included multiple clinical end-points and hemodynamic outcomes. Propensity score matching was performed to adjust for prognostic factors, and subanalyses with small valve sizes (< 23 mm) and suturing techniques were performed. Results: The pledgeted group comprised 640 patients (59%), and the nonpledgeted group 442 (41%), with baseline discrepancies in demographic characteristics, comorbidities, and stenosis severity. There were no differences between groups in any outcome. After propensity score matching, the primary outcome occurred in 41 (11.7%) patients in the pledgeted and 36 (9.8%) in the nonpledgeted group (P = .51). The effective orifice area was smaller in the pledgeted group (P = .045), whereas no difference was observed for the mean or peak pressure gradient. Separate subanalyses with small valve sizes and suturing techniques did not show relevant differences. Conclusions: In this large propensity score-matched cohort, comprehensive clinical outcomes were comparable between patients who underwent aortic valve replacement with pledgeted and nonpledgeted sutures up to 5 years of follow-up, but pledgets might lead to a slightly smaller effective orifice area in the long run. Show less
ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to compare short- and midterm clinical and echocardiographic outcomes according to the use of pledgeted sutures during aortic valve replacement... Show moreObjectiveThe objective of this study was to compare short- and midterm clinical and echocardiographic outcomes according to the use of pledgeted sutures during aortic valve replacement.MethodsPatients with aortic stenosis or regurgitation requiring aortic valve replacement were enrolled in a prospective cohort study to evaluate the safety of a new stented bioprosthesis. Outcomes were analyzed according to the use of pledgets (pledgeted group) or no pledgets (nonpledgeted group). The primary outcome was a composite of thromboembolism, endocarditis, and major paravalvular leak at 5 years of follow-up. Secondary outcomes included multiple clinical endpoints and hemodynamic outcomes. Propensity score matching was performed to adjust for prognostic factors, and subanalyses with small valve sizes (<23 mm) and suturing techniques were performed.ResultsThe pledgeted group comprised 640 patients (59%), and the nonpledgeted group 442 (41%), with baseline discrepancies in demographic characteristics, comorbidities, and stenosis severity. There were no differences between groups in any outcome. After propensity score matching, the primary outcome occurred in 41 (11.7%) patients in the pledgeted and 36 (9.8%) in the nonpledgeted group (P = .51). The effective orifice area was smaller in the pledgeted group (P = .045), whereas no difference was observed for the mean or peak pressure gradient. Separate subanalyses with small valve sizes and suturing techniques did not show relevant differences.ConclusionsIn this large propensity score-matched cohort, comprehensive clinical outcomes were comparable between patients who underwent aortic valve replacement with pledgeted and nonpledgeted sutures up to 5 years of follow-up, but pledgets might lead to a slightly smaller effective orifice area in the long run. Show less
Objective: Patients with Marfan syndrome (MFS) and patients with a bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) have a significantly increased risk to develop thoracic aortopathy. Both conditions share many... Show moreObjective: Patients with Marfan syndrome (MFS) and patients with a bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) have a significantly increased risk to develop thoracic aortopathy. Both conditions share many pathophysiological mechanisms leading to aortic complications. Bicuspidy is known to have a low risk for acquired coronary artery sclerosis. The aim of this study is to determine the risk of coronary sclerosis in MFS patients. Methods: Marfan syndrome patients with an aortic root dilatation, which were surgically treated between 1999 and 2017, were included and matched with BAV and tricuspid aortic valves (TAV) patients based on sex and age. Cardiovascular risk profiles were determined in all three groups. Coronary sclerosis was graded in all patients on coronary imaging (coronary angiography or computed tomography) using a coronary artery scoring method, which divides the coronaries in 28 segments and scores non-obstructive (20-49% sclerosis) and obstructive coronary sclerosis (>49% sclerosis) in each segment. Results: A total of 90 matched patients (30 within each group) were included. MFS patients showed less cardiovascular risk factors compared to BAV and TAV patients. TAV patients had higher amounts of obstructive coronary sclerosis as compared to BAV patients (p = 0.039) and MFS patients (p = 0.032). No difference in non- and obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) was found between the MFS and BAV population. Conclusion: Marfan syndrome and bicuspid aortic valve patients have a significantly lower risk for, and prevalence of CAD as compared to TAV individuals. Show less
Dolmaci, O.B.; Mathari, S. el; Driessen, A.H.G.; Klautz, R.J.M.; Poelmann, R.E.; Lindeman, J.H.N.; Grewal, N. 2023
Objectives: Abdominal aortic aneurysms are associated with a sharply increased cardiovascular risk. Cardiovascular risk management is therefore recommended in prevailing guidelines for abdominal... Show moreObjectives: Abdominal aortic aneurysms are associated with a sharply increased cardiovascular risk. Cardiovascular risk management is therefore recommended in prevailing guidelines for abdominal aneurysm patients. It has been hypothesized that associated risk relates to loss of aortic compliance. If this hypothesis is correct, observations for abdominal aneurysms would also apply to thoracic aortic aneurysms. The objective of this study is to test whether thoracic aneurysms are also associated with an increased cardiovascular risk burden. Methods: Patients who underwent aortic valve or root surgery were included in the study (n = 239). Cardiovascular risk factors were studied and atherosclerosis was scored based on the preoperative coronary angiographies. Multivariate analyses were performed, controlling for cardiovascular risk factors and aortic valve morphology. Comparisons were made with the age- and gender-matched general population and non-aneurysm patients as control groups. A thoracic aortic aneurysm was defined as an aortic aneurysm of >= 45 mm. Results: Thoracic aortic aneurysm was not associated with an increased coronary atherosclerotic burden (p = 0.548). Comparison with the general population revealed a significantly higher prevalence of hypertension (61.4% vs. 32.2%, p < 0.001) and a lower prevalence of diabetes (1.4% vs. 13.1%, p = 0.001) in the thoracic aneurysm group. Conclusions: The extreme cardiovascular risk associated with abdominal aortic aneurysms is location-specific and not explained by loss of aortic compliance. Thoracic aortic aneurysm, in contrast to abdominal, is not part of the atherosclerotic disease spectrum and, therefore, cardiovascular risk management does not need to be implemented in treatment guidelines of isolated thoracic aneurysms. Hypertension should be treated. Show less
