R. Gurvitch

An Embolic Deflection Device for Aortic Valve Interventions

OBJECTIVESnWe describe initial human experience with a novel cerebral embolic protection device.nnnBACKGROUNDnCerebral emboli are the major cause of procedural stroke during percutaneous aortic valve interventions.nnnMETHODSnWith right radial artery access, the embolic protection device is advanced into the aortic arch. Once deployed a porous membrane shields the brachiocephalic trunk and the left carotid artery deflecting emboli away from the cerebral circulation. Embolic material is not contained or removed by the device. The device was used in 4 patients (mean age 90 years) with severe aortic stenosis undergoing aortic balloon valvuloplasty (n = 1) or transcatheter aortic valve implantation (n = 3).nnnRESULTSnCorrect placement of the embolic protection device was achieved without difficulty in all patients. Continuous brachiocephalic and aortic pressure monitoring documented equal pressures without evidence of obstruction to cerebral perfusion. Additional procedural time due to the use of the device was 13 min (interquartile range: 12 to 16 min). There were no procedural complications. Pre-discharge cerebral magnetic resonance imaging found no new defects in any of 3 patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation and a new 5-mm acute cortical infarct in 1 asymptomatic patient after balloon valvuloplasty alone. No patient developed new neurological symptoms or clinical findings of stroke.nnnCONCLUSIONSnEmbolic protection during transcatheter aortic valve intervention seems feasible and might have the potential to reduce the risk of cerebral embolism and stroke.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

Background—Although short- and medium-term outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation are encouraging, long-term data on valve function and clinical outcomes are limited. Methods and Results—Consecutive high-risk patients who had been declined as surgical candidates because of comorbidities but who underwent successful transcatheter aortic valve implantation with a balloon-expandable valve between January 2005 and December 2006 and survived past 30 days were assessed. Clinical, echocardiographic, and computed tomographic follow-up examinations were performed. Seventy patients who underwent successful procedures and survived longer than 30 days were evaluated at a minimum follow-up of 3 years. At a median follow-up of 3.7 years (interquartile range 3.4 to 4.3 years), survival was 57%. Survival at 1, 2, and 3 years was 81%, 74%, and 61%, respectively. Freedom from reoperation was 98.5% (1 patient with endocarditis). During this early procedural experience, 11 patients died within 30 days, and 8 ...

Pathology of transcatheter valve therapy.

OBJECTIVESnThis study sought to report on the pathology of transcatheter aortic valves explanted at early and late time points after transcatheter aortic valve implantation.nnnBACKGROUNDnInformation on pathological findings following transcatheter aortic valve implantation is scarce, particularly late after transcatheter aortic valve implantation.nnnMETHODSnThis study included 20 patients (13 men, median age 80 years [interquartile range: 72 to 84] years) with previous transcatheter aortic valve implantation with a valve explanted at autopsy (n = 17) or surgery (n = 3) up to 30 months after implantation (10 transapical and 10 transfemoral procedures).nnnRESULTSnStructural valve degeneration was not seen, although fibrous tissue ingrowth was observed at later time points with minimal effects on cusp mobility in 1 case. Minor alterations in valve configuration or placement were observed in up to 50% of cases, but they were not accompanied by substantial changes in valve function or reliably associated with chest compressions. Vascular or myocardial injury was common, especially within 30 days of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (about 69%), with the latter associated with left coronary ostial occlusion by calcified native aortic valve tissue in 2 cases. Mild to severe myocardial amyloidosis was present in nearly 33% of cases and likely played a role in the poor outcome of 3 patients. Endocarditis, migration of the valve, and embolization during the procedure led to surgical valve removal.nnnCONCLUSIONSnStructural degeneration was not seen and minor alterations of valve configuration or placement did not affect valve function and were not reliably caused by chest compressions. Vascular or myocardial injury is very common early after transcatheter aortic valve implantation and myocardial amyloidosis represents a relatively frequent potentially significant comorbid condition.