Peter de Jaegere

A comparison of balloon-expandable-stent implantation with balloon angioplasty in patients with coronary artery disease

BACKGROUND Balloon-expandable coronary-artery stents were developed to prevent coronary restenosis after coronary angioplasty. These devices hold coronary vessels open at sites that have been dilated. However, it is unknown whether stenting improves long-term angiographic and clinical outcomes as compared with standard balloon angioplasty. METHODS A total of 520 patients with stable angina and a single coronary-artery lesion were randomly assigned to either stent implantation (262 patients) or standard balloon angioplasty (258 patients). The primary clinical end points were death, the occurrence of a cerebrovascular accident, myocardial infarction, the need for coronary-artery bypass surgery, or a second percutaneous intervention involving the previously treated lesion, either at the time of the initial procedure or during the subsequent seven months. The primary angiographic end point was the minimal luminal diameter at follow-up, as determined by quantitative coronary angiography. RESULTS After exclusions, 52 patients in the stent group (20 percent) and 76 patients in the angioplasty group (30 percent) reached a primary clinical end point (relative risk, 0.68; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.50 to 0.92; P = 0.02). The difference in clinical-event rates was explained mainly by a reduced need for a second coronary angioplasty in the stent group (relative risk, 0.58; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.40 to 0.85; P = 0.005). The mean (+/- SD) minimal luminal diameters immediately after the procedure were 2.48 +/- 0.39 mm in the stent group and 2.05 +/- 0.33 mm in the angioplasty group; at follow-up, the diameters were 1.82 +/- 0.64 mm in the stent group and 1.73 +/- 0.55 mm in the angioplasty group (P = 0.09), which correspond to rates of restenosis (diameter of stenosis, > or = 50 percent) of 22 and 32 percent, respectively (P = 0.02). Peripheral vascular complications necessitating surgery, blood transfusion, or both were more frequent after stenting than after balloon angioplasty (13.5 vs. 3.1 percent, P < 0.001). The mean hospital stay was significantly longer in the stent group than in the angioplasty group (8.5 vs. 3.1 days, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS Over seven months of follow-up, the clinical and angiographic outcomes were better in patients who received a stent than in those who received standard coronary angioplasty. However, this benefit was achieved at the cost of a significantly higher risk of vascular complications at the access site and a longer hospital stay.

Transcatheter valve implantation for patients with aortic stenosis: a position statement from the European Association of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS) and the European Society of Cardiology (ESC), in collaboration with the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI)

AIMS To critically review the available transcatheter aortic valve implantation techniques and their results, as well as propose recommendations for their use and development. METHODS AND RESULTS A committee of experts including European Association of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery and European Society of Cardiology representatives met to reach a consensus based on the analysis of the available data obtained with transcatheter aortic valve implantation and their own experience. The evidence suggests that this technique is feasible and provides haemodynamic and clinical improvement for up to 2 years in patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis at high risk or with contraindications for surgery. Questions remain mainly concerning safety and long-term durability, which have to be assessed. Surgeons and cardiologists working as a team should select candidates, perform the procedure, and assess the results. Today, the use of this technique should be restricted to high-risk patients or those with contraindications for surgery. However, this may be extended to lower risk patients if the initial promise holds to be true after careful evaluation. CONCLUSION Transcatheter aortic valve implantation is a promising technique, which may offer an alternative to conventional surgery for high-risk patients with aortic stenosis. Today, careful evaluation is needed to avoid the risk of uncontrolled diffusion.

Procedural and 30-day outcomes following transcatheter aortic valve implantation using the third generation (18 Fr) corevalve revalving system: results from the multicentre, expanded evaluation registry 1-year following CE mark approval

AIMS To describe the procedural performance and 30-day outcomes following implantation using the 18 Fr CoreValve Revalving System (CRS) as part of the multicentre, expanded evaluation registry, 1-year after obtaining CE mark approval. METHODS AND RESULTS Patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis and logistic Euroscore > or =15%, or age > or =75 years, or age > or =65 years associated with pre-defined risk factors, and for whom a physician proctor and a clinical specialist were in attendance during the implantation and who collected the clinical data, were included. From April 2007, to April 2008, 646 patients with a mean age of 81 +/- 6.6 years, mean aortic valve area 0.6 +/- 0.2 cm2, and logistic EuroSCORE of 23.1 +/- 13.8% were recruited. After valve implantation, the mean transaortic valve gradient decreased from 49.4 +/- 13.9 to 3 +/- 2 mmHg. All patients had paravalvular aortic regurgitation < or = grade 2. The rate of procedural success was 97%. The procedural mortality rate was 1.5%. At 30 days, the all-cause mortality rate (i.e, including procedural) was 8% and the combined rate of death, stroke and myocardial infarction was 9.3%. CONCLUSIONS The results of this study demonstrate the high rate of procedural success and a low 30-day mortality in a large cohort of high-risk patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with the CRS.

Anatomy of the Aortic Valvar Complex and Its Implications for Transcatheter Implantation of the Aortic Valve

The books and articles devoted to the anatomy of the aortic valvar complex are numerous. Until now, however, little consideration has been given to understanding the anatomy with percutaneous valvar replacement in mind. It is axiomatic that knowledge of the anatomy of the valve is fundamental in understanding key principles involved in valvar replacement. Such an appreciation of the anatomy helps better understand the optimal positioning for the prosthetic valve within the root of the aortia with respect to the coronary arteries, mitral valve, and the conduction system and may circumvent complications that can arise during its implantation. In this review, therefore, we describe the anatomy of the trifoliate aortic valvar complex and its implications for percutaneous valvar replacement.

Short- and Long-Term Clinical Outcome After Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation for the Percutaneous Treatment of Left Main Coronary Artery Disease Insights From the Rapamycin-Eluting and Taxus Stent Evaluated At Rotterdam Cardiology Hospital Registries (RESEARCH and T-SEARCH)

Background—The impact of drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation on the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events in patients undergoing percutaneous intervention for left main (LM) coronary disease is largely unknown. Methods and Results—From April 2001 to December 2003, 181 patients underwent percutaneous coronary intervention for LM stenosis at our institution. The first cohort consisted of 86 patients (19 protected LM) treated with bare metal stents (pre-DES group); the second cohort comprised 95 patients (15 protected LM) treated exclusively with DES. The 2 cohorts were well balanced for all baseline characteristics. At a median follow-up of 503 days (range, 331 to 873 days), the cumulative incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events was lower in the DES cohort than in patients in the pre-DES group (24% versus 45%, respectively; hazard ratio [HR], 0.52 [95% CI, 0.31 to 0.88]; P=0.01). Total mortality did not differ between cohorts; however, there were significantly lower rates of both myocardial infarction (4% versus 12%, respectively; HR, 0.22 [95% CI, 0.07 to 0.65]; P=0.006) and target vessel revascularization (6% versus 23%, respectively; HR, 0.26 [95% CI, 0.10 to 0.65]; P=0.004) in the DES group. On multivariate analysis, use of DES, Parsonnet classification, troponin elevation at entry, distal LM location, and reference vessel diameter were independent predictors of major adverse cardiovascular events. Conclusions—When percutaneous coronary intervention is undertaken at LM lesions, routine DES implantation, which reduces the cumulative incidence of myocardial infarction and the need for target vessel revascularization compared with bare metal stents, should currently be the preferred strategy.

Early and Persistent Intraventricular Conduction Abnormalities and Requirements for Pacemaking After Percutaneous Replacement of the Aortic Valve

OBJECTIVES In this retrospective study, we examined the incidence of post-procedural conduction abnormalities and the need for pacing in patients undergoing percutaneous implantation of the aortic valve. BACKGROUND Safety and feasibility studies have suggested anecdotally the occurrence of conduction abnormalities and requirements for pacing after percutaneous implantation of the aortic valve. METHODS We examined the standard 12-lead electrocardiograms (ECGs) of 40 consecutive patients in whom a CoreValve Revalving System (CoreValve, Paris, France) was implanted between November 2005 and March 2008. We examined the 12-lead ECG before treatment, after treatment, and at 1-month follow-up. We documented the requirements for temporary or permanent pacemaking. RESULTS The mean age of patients was 82 +/- 7 years. Post-procedural mortality at 72 h was 0%. There was a significant increase in the frequency of left bundle branch block (LBBB) after percutaneous aortic valve replacement (15% before treatment vs. 55% after treatment, p = 0.001). Although the incidence of LBBB had decreased after follow-up of 1 month, it did not reach statistical significance, with the proportion decreasing from 55% to 48% (p = 0.63). The only 2 patients with pre-treatment right bundle branch block became dependent on temporary pacing immediately after valve implantation and subsequently needed permanent pacing. A temporary and permanent pacemaker was required in 20% and 18% of patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS In this study, there was a significant increase in the frequency of LBBB after percutaneous insertion of the aortic valvar prosthesis. Patients with pre-existing right bundle branch block may be at risk for the development of complete heart block and subsequent need for pacing.

Balloon angioplasty for the treatment of lesions in saphenous vein bypass grafts

OBJECTIVES The purpose of this review is to assess the value and limitations of balloon angioplasty for the treatment of saphenous vein bypass graft obstructions. The potential efficacy of new interventional techniques is discussed. BACKGROUND Treatment of ischemia due to saphenous vein bypass graft obstructions poses a difficult problem that will be encountered more often as the pool of surgically treated patients continues to accumulate. Reoperation is technically demanding and is associated with high mortality and morbidity rates. Balloon angioplasty may provide a suitable alternative. METHODS The review proposes a classification of patients with attempted saphenous vein graft angioplasty according to expected early and late outcome based on the data obtained from the relevant published data and personal experience. RESULTS Angioplasty of a nonocclusive obstruction in a saphenous vein bypass graft has an initial success rate of approximately 90% and is a safe procedure (procedural death rate < 1%, myocardial infarction rate < 4%). The overall average restenosis rate is 42%. Surgical standby is limited and technically difficult. Angioplasty of chronic total occlusions in old grafts is associated with poor initial and long-term results. The long-term clinical results are unfavorable because of the continuing progression of disease in nontreated vein graft segments and native coronary arteries, in addition to the high restenosis rate. New techniques, although promising, have shown neither better initial results nor reduction of restenosis. Stent placement may be useful in longer graft lesions containing friable material. CONCLUSIONS Patients may be classified into three groups according to expected early and late outcome on the basis of 1) unfavorable graft anatomy, 2) risk of cardiogenic shock in event of acute graft closure, and 3) age of grafts. The three groups are 1) those with an initial high success, low procedural risk and low restenosis rate; 2) those with an initial high success but high procedural risk and moderate to high restenosis rate; and 3) those with a low success, high risk and high restenosis rate. Balloon angioplasty to treat lesions in venous bypass grafts should be considered a palliative procedure, not a long-term solution, for ongoing progression of coronary artery and vein graft disease. The induced high restenosis rate remains a significant problem.

Coronary-artery stenting compared with balloon angioplasty for restenosis after initial balloon angioplasty. Restenosis Stent Study Group.

BACKGROUND Intracoronary stenting reduces the rate of restenosis after angioplasty in patients with new coronary lesions. We conducted a prospective, randomized, multicenter study to determine whether intracoronary stenting, as compared with standard balloon angioplasty, reduces the recurrence of luminal narrowing in restenotic lesions. METHODS A total of 383 patients who had undergone at least one balloon angioplasty and who had clinical and angiographic evidence of restenosis after the procedure were randomly assigned to undergo standard balloon angioplasty (192 patients) or intracoronary stenting with a Palmaz-Schatz stent (191 patients). The primary end point was angiographic evidence of restenosis (defined as stenosis of more than 50 percent of the luminal diameter) at six months. The secondary end points were death, Q-wave myocardial infarction, bypass surgery, and revascularization of the target vessel. RESULTS The rate of restenosis was significantly higher in the angioplasty group than in the stent group (32 percent as compared with 18 percent, P= 0.03). Revascularization of the target vessel at six months was required in 27 percent of the angioplasty group but in only 10 percent of the stent group (P=0.001). This difference resulted from a smaller mean (+/-SD) minimal luminal diameter in the angioplasty group (1.85+/-0.56 mm) than in the stent group (2.04+/-0.66 mm), with a mean difference of 0.19 mm (P=0.01) at follow-up. Subacute thrombosis occurred in 0.6 percent of the angioplasty group and in 3.9 percent of the stent group. The rate of event-free survival at 250 days was 72 percent in the angioplasty group and 84 percent in the stent group (P=0.04). CONCLUSIONS Elective coronary stenting was effective in the treatment of restenosis after balloon angioplasty. Stenting resulted in a lower rate of recurrent stenosis despite a higher incidence of subacute thrombosis.

Timing, Predictive Factors, and Prognostic Value of Cerebrovascular Events in a Large Cohort of Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

Background— The objective of this study was to evaluate the timing, predictive factors, and prognostic value of cerebrovascular events (CVEs) after transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Methods and Results— The study included 1061 consecutive patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation with a balloon-expandable (64%) or self-expandable (36%) valve. CVEs were classified as acute (⩽24 hours), subacute (1–30 days), or late (>30 days). CVEs occurred in 54 patients (5.1%; stroke, 4.2%) within 30 days after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (acute in 54% of cases). The predictors of acute CVEs were balloon postdilation of the valve prosthesis (odds ratio, 2.46; 95% confidence interval,1.07–5.67) and valve dislodgment/embolization (odds ratio, 4.36; 95% CI, 1.21–15.69); new-onset atrial fibrillation (odds ratio, 2.76; 95% CI, 1.11–6.83) was a predictor of subacute CVEs. Late CVEs occurred in 35 patients (3.3%; stroke, 2.1%) at a median follow-up of 12 months (3–23 months). The predictors of late CVEs were chronic atrial fibrillation (2.84; 95% CI, 1.46–5.53), peripheral vascular disease (hazard ratio, 2.02; 95% CI, 1.02–3.97), and prior cerebrovascular disease (hazard ratio, 2.04; 95% CI, 1.01–4.15). Major stroke was associated with 30-day (odds ratio, 7.43; 95% CI, 2.45–22.53) and late (hazard ratio, 1.75; 95% CI, 1.01–3.04) mortality. Conclusions— In a large cohort of patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation, the rates of acute and subacute CVEs were 2.7% and 2.4%, respectively. While balloon postdilation and valve dislodgment/embolization were the predictors of acute CVEs, new-onset atrial fibrillation determined a higher risk for subacute events. Late events were determined mainly by a history of chronic atrial fibrillation and peripheral and cerebrovascular disease. The occurrence of major stroke was associated with increased early and late mortality. These results provide important insights for the implementation of preventive measures for CVEs after transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

Transcatheter valve implantation for patients with aortic stenosis: a position statement from the European Association of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS) and the European Society of Cardiology (ESC), in collaboration with the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI).

AIMS To critically review the available transcatheter aortic valve implantation techniques and their results, as well as propose recommendations for their use and development. METHODS AND RESULTS A committee of experts including European Association of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery and European Society of Cardiology representatives met to reach a consensus based on the analysis of the available data obtained with transcatheter aortic valve implantation and their own experience. The evidence suggests that this technique is feasible and provides haemodynamic and clinical improvement for up to 2 years in patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis at high risk or with contraindications for surgery. Questions remain mainly concerning safety and long-term durability, which have to be assessed. Surgeons and cardiologists working as a team should select candidates, perform the procedure, and assess the results. Today, the use of this technique should be restricted to high-risk patients or those with contraindications for surgery. However, this may be extended to lower risk patients if the initial promise holds to be true after careful evaluation. CONCLUSION Transcatheter aortic valve implantation is a promising technique, which may offer an alternative to conventional surgery for high-risk patients with aortic stenosis. Today, careful evaluation is needed to avoid the risk of uncontrolled diffusion.