Arvind K. Agnihotri

2012 ACCF/AATS/SCAI/STS expert consensus document on transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

Robert A. Harrington, MD, FACC, Chair Deepak L. Bhatt, MD, MPH, FACC, Vice Chair Victor A. Ferrari, MD, FACC John D. Fisher, MD, FACC Mario J. Garcia, MD, FACC Timothy J. Gardner, MD, FACC Federico Gentile, MD, FACC Michael F. Gilson, MD, FACC Adrian F. Hernandez, MD, FACC Alice K. Jacobs

Coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with an ejection fraction of twenty percent or less

Over a 7-year period, 5.8% (n = 210) of patients who underwent coronary artery bypass grafting at our institution had severely impaired global left ventricular function with an ejection fraction of 20% or less. Mean age at operation was 66 years (+/- 0.7; standard error), and 76% of patients were male. Primary indications for operation were unstable angina (73 patients, 35%), return of symptoms with previous bypass grafting (41 patients, 20%), congestive heart failure with reversible ischemia (55 patients, 26%), and recurrent ventricular arrhythmias (41 patients, 20%). Overall, actuarial survival (n = 210) was 82%, 79%, and 73% at 1, 2, and 5 years. Risk of death was highest early after the operation, and then declined rapidly to a constant level. Patients who did not receive retrograde coronary sinus cardioplegia (p = 0.05), older patients (p = 0.004), and those with preoperative ventricular arrhythmias (p = 0.003) or renal failure (p < 0.0001) had an increased risk of death early after operation. Patients with congestive symptoms and those requiring extensive or redo bypass grafting (p = 0.02) were found to be at an increased risk of death throughout the follow-up period. When the number of distal anastomoses performed increased, survival was found to decrease (p < 0.003), and to a greater extent in women than in men (p = 0.02). Of the four primary indications for operation, unstable angina yielded the highest risk-adjusted survival. Successful results after surgical revascularization in patients with severe impairment of ventricular function can be achieved by careful patient selection and management.

Drug-eluting stent for left main coronary artery disease. The DELTA registry: a multicenter registry evaluating percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting for left main treatment.

OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to compare, in a large all-comers registry, major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with first-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) versus coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) stenosis. BACKGROUND Percutaneous coronary intervention with DES implantation in ULMCA has been shown to be a feasible and safe approach at midterm clinical follow-up. METHODS All consecutive patients with ULMCA stenosis treated by PCI with DES versus CABG were analyzed in this multinational registry. A propensity score analysis was performed to adjust for baseline differences in the overall cohort. RESULTS In total 2,775 patients were included: 1,874 were treated with PCI versus 901 with CABG. At 1,295 (interquartile range: 928 to 1,713) days, there were no differences, at the adjusted analysis, in the primary composite endpoint of death, cerebrovascular accidents, and myocardial infarction (MI) (adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 1.11; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.85 to 1.42; p = 0.47), mortality (adjusted HR: 1.16; 95% CI: 0.87 to 1.55; p = 0.32), or composite endpoint of death and MI (adjusted HR: 1.25; 95% CI: 0.95 to 1.64; p = 0.11). An advantage of CABG over PCI was observed in the composite secondary endpoint of MACCE (adjusted HR: 1.64; 95% CI: 1.33 to 2.03; p < 0.0001), driven exclusively by the higher incidence of target vessel revascularization with PCI. CONCLUSIONS In our multinational all-comers registry, no difference was observed in the occurrence of death, cerebrovascular accidents, and MI between PCI and CABG. An advantage of CABG over PCI was observed in the incidence of MACCE, driven by the higher incidence of target vessel revascularization with PCI.

The prevalence of infective endocarditis after aortic valve replacement.

Replacement valve endocarditis occurred in 3.7% of 2443 patients who underwent primary or redo aortic valve replacements at The Prince Charles Hospital between December 31, 1969 and January 1, 1992, based on a cross-sectional follow-up in 1992 which was 98.8% complete. Because some patients had re-replacements during the study period, a total of 2686 operations were considered for analysis. A variety of replacement devices were used, including 571 allografts (21%), 1152 xenografts (43%), and 880 mechanical valves (36%). Insertion of an allograft valve resulted in a constant risk of endocarditis which, by multivariable hazard function analysis, negated the effect of any early-phase factors (p < 0.0001). With other replacement devices, the risk of infection peaked early after operation (9 weeks) and then gave way to a constant risk. Compared with the risk associated with allograft valves, constant risk was higher when the replacement device was a Carpentier-Edwards xenograft (n = 1021, p = 0.02) and lower when a St. Jude Medical mechanical valve was used (n = 505, p = 0.05). In nonallograft recipients, the presence of active preoperative endocarditis (p < 0.0001) or a concomitant synthetic synthetic aortic root replacement (p = 0.0006) increased the magnitude of the early peaking risk. Regardless of replacement device, constant risk was increased in patients with renal dysfunction (p = 0.01), in younger patients 0.04). When preoperative endocarditis was caused by Staphylococcus aureus, culture-positive postoperative wound infection was associated with increased risk of replacement valve infection (p < 0.001) and when it occurred, the same organism was usually responsible (86%). Identification of patients at increased risk for replacement valve infection may lead to reduced morbidity through strategies such as selective use of replacement devices and antimicrobial prophylaxis.

Prospective, Comprehensive Assessment of Cardiac Troponin T Testing After Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery

Background— The significance and clinical role of cardiac troponin testing after coronary artery bypass grafting remain unclear. Methods and Results— Cardiac troponin T (cTnT) was measured during the first 24 hours after coronary artery bypass graft surgery in 847 consecutive patients. Only 17 patients (2.0%) had new Q waves or left bundle-branch block after surgery; however, cTnT elevation was observed in nearly all subjects, with a median cTnT concentration of 1.08 ng/mL overall. Direct predictors of postoperative cTnT values included preoperative myocardial infarction (P<0.001), preoperative intraaortic balloon pump (P<0.001), intraoperative/postoperative intraaortic balloon pump (P<0.001), number of distal anastomoses (P=0.005), bypass time (P<0.001), and number of intraoperative defibrillations (P=0.009), whereas glomerular filtration rate (P<0.001), off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (P=0.003), and use of warm cardioplegia (P=0.02) were inversely associated with cTnT values. A linear association was seen between cTnT levels and length of stay and ventilator hours, and in an analysis adjusted for the Society for Thoracic Surgery Risk Model, cTnT remained independently prognostic for death (odds ratio, 3.20; P=0.003), death or heart failure (odds ratio, 2.04; P=0.008), death or need for vasopressors (odds ratio, 2.70; P<0.001), and the composite of all 3 (odds ratio, 2.57; P<0.001). In contrast to consensus-endorsed cTnT cut points for postoperative evaluation, a cTnT <1.60 ng/mL had a negative predictive value of 93% to 99% for excluding various post–coronary artery bypass graft surgery complications. Conclusions— cTnT concentrations after coronary artery bypass graft surgery are nearly universally elevated, are determined by numerous factors, and are independently prognostic for impending postoperative complications when used at appropriate cut points.

Endoscopic versus open saphenous vein harvest: a comparison of postoperative wound complications

BACKGROUND Wound complications associated with long incisions used to harvest the greater saphenous vein are well documented. Recent reports suggest that techniques of endoscopic vein harvest may result in decreased wound complications. A prospective, nonrandomized study was developed to compare outcomes of open versus endoscopic vein harvest procedures. METHODS There were 106 patients in the open vein harvest group, and 154 patients in the endoscopic vein harvest group. Patient characteristics and demographics were similar in both groups. Wound complications identified were dehiscence, drainage for greater than 2 weeks postoperatively, cellulitis, hematoma, and seroma/lymphocele. RESULTS Wound complications were significantly less in the endoscopic vein harvest group (9 of 133, 6.8%) versus the open vein harvest group (26 of 92, 28.3%), p less than 0.001. By multivariable analysis with logistic regression, the open vein harvest technique was the only risk factor for postoperative leg wound complication (relative risk 4.0). CONCLUSIONS Endoscopic vein harvest offered improved patient outcomes in terms of wound healing compared with the open vein harvest technique.

Changes in mitral regurgitation after replacement of the stenotic aortic valve.

BACKGROUND Concomitant mitral regurgitation (MR) is frequently seen in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement (AVR) for aortic stenosis. This study was undertaken to characterize the magnitude of MR in these patients and identify factors associated with significant postoperative change. METHODS Between 2002 and 2006, 391 patients with stenotic AV disease but no structural mitral valve disease underwent AVR without coronary artery bypass grafting. Excluded were 164 patients with combined aortic and mitral intervention, right heart surgery, or moderate to severe aortic insufficiency, to yield a final study group of 227 patients. Follow-up echographic evaluation of MR was obtained in 87 of 219 patients (40%) discharged alive without mitral valve intervention. RESULTS Overall mortality was 3.5%. After AVR, intraoperative MR severity improved in 66% of patients. Independent predictors of lower postoperative MR were small left atrial size (p = 0.03), the presence of aortic insufficiency (p < 0.01), and preoperative congestive heart failure (p = 0.04). Prosthetic valve type or size was not an independent predictor of postoperative MR. After adjustment for intraoperative underestimation of MR grade, there was no difference between the postprocedural MR grade and the early or late follow-up MR grade (p = 0.6 and p = 0.8, respectively). CONCLUSIONS The results of this study support a conservative, tailored approach to concomitant mitral surgery in patients presenting for correction of aortic stenosis who demonstrate functional mitral regurgitation. Characteristics associated with resolution may allow for identification of patients most likely to benefit from mitral valve repair or replacement.

Current era minimally invasive aortic valve replacement: Techniques and practice

BACKGROUND Since the first aortic valve replacement through a right thoracotomy was reported in 1993, upper hemisternotomy and right anterior thoracotomy have become the predominant approaches for minimally invasive aortic valve replacement. Clinical studies have documented equivalent operative mortality, less bleeding, and reduced intensive care/hospital stay compared with conventional sternotomy despite longer procedure times. However, comparative trials face challenges due to patient preference, surgeon bias, and the lack of a standardized minimally invasive surgical approach. METHODS Twenty cardiothoracic surgeons from 19 institutions across the United States, with a combined experience of nearly 5000 minimally invasive aortic valve replacement operations, formed a working group to develop a basis for a standardized approach to patient evaluation, operative technique, and postoperative care. In addition, a stepwise learning program for surgeons was outlined. RESULTS Improved cosmesis, less pain and narcotic use, and faster recovery have been reported and generally accepted by patients and by surgeons performing minimally invasive aortic valve replacement. These benefits are more likely to be verified with standardization of the procedure itself, which will greatly facilitate the design and implementation of future clinical studies. CONCLUSIONS Surgeons interested in learning and performing minimally invasive aortic valve replacement must have expertise in conventional aortic valve replacement at centers with adequate case volumes. A team approach that coordinates efforts of the surgeon, anesthesiologist, perfusionist, and nurses is required to achieve the best clinical outcomes. By first developing fundamental minimally invasive skills using specialized cannulation techniques, neck lines, and long-shafted instruments in the setting of conventional full sternotomy, the safest operative environment is afforded to patients.

Surgical management and long-term outcomes for acute ascending aortic dissection

OBJECTIVE We sought to assess early and late survival and cardiovascular-specific mortality after surgical repair of acute ascending aortic dissection and the effect of differences in surgical technique, patient characteristics, and preoperative diagnostic testing. METHODS Between 1979 and 2003, 195 consecutive patients underwent repair for acute ascending aortic dissection within 2 weeks of the onset of symptoms. Mean follow-up was 7.0 +/- 5.9 years (range, 0-26 years) and was 100% complete. RESULTS Patients were aged 62 +/- 15 years on average and were mostly male (66%) and hypertensive (69%). Risk of death early and late after the operation decreased over the study period, with hospital mortality decreasing from 21% to 4% when comparing the first and most recent quartiles (P = .007, chi(2) test for trend). At 1, 5, 10, and 20 years postoperatively, survival was 84%, 69%, 55%, and 30%, respectively, and freedom from cardiovascular death was 86%, 80%, 71%, and 51%, respectively. Additional independent risk factors for death were older age (P < .001), renal dysfunction (P < .003), syncope (P = .007), and peripheral vascular disease (P = .006). During the study period, echocardiographic and computed tomographic diagnostic imaging replaced routine aortic angiographic analysis, and operative techniques involved more frequent use of open distal anastomoses, retrograde cerebral perfusion, earlier restoration of antegrade perfusion, and a conservative approach to aortic arch repair. Freedom from reoperation on the aorta or aortic valve was 93% and 84% at 5 and 10 years, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Early and late survival after repair of acute ascending aortic dissection has improved progressively over 25 years in association with noticeable changes in preoperative and intraoperative management. Aortic reoperations were infrequent during follow-up.

Educational program in crisis management for cardiac surgery teams including high realism simulation

INTRODUCTION Cardiac surgery demands effective teamwork for safe, high-quality care. The objective of this pilot study was to develop a comprehensive program to sharpen performance of experienced cardiac surgical teams in acute crisis management. METHODS We developed and implemented an educational program for cardiac surgery based on high realism acute crisis simulation scenarios and interactive whole-unit workshop. The impact of these interventions was assessed with postintervention questionnaires, preintervention and 6-month postintervention surveys, and structured interviews. RESULTS The realism of the acute crisis simulation scenarios gradually improved; most participants rated both the simulation and whole-unit workshop as very good or excellent. Repeat simulation training was recommended every 6 to 12 months by 82% of the participants. Participants of the interactive workshop identified 2 areas of highest priority: encouraging speaking up about critical information and interprofessional information sharing. They also stressed the importance of briefings, early communication of surgical plan, knowing members of the team, and continued simulation for practice. The pre/post survey response rates were 70% (55/79) and 66% (52/79), respectively. The concept of working as a team improved between surveys (P = .028), with a trend for improvement in gaining common understanding of the plan before a procedure (P = .075) and appropriate resolution of disagreements (P = .092). Interviewees reported that the training had a positive effect on their personal behaviors and patient care, including speaking up more readily and communicating more clearly. CONCLUSIONS Comprehensive team training using simulation and a whole-unit interactive workshop can be successfully deployed for experienced cardiac surgery teams with demonstrable benefits in participants perception of team performance.