RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Predictors of permanent pacemaker implantation (PPMI) after self-expanding transcatheter aortic valve implant (TAVI) were described. Is unknown if PPMI predictors remain in the era of high implants using the cusp overlap (COP). METHODS: Single-center, prospective, consecutive case series of patients undergoing self-expanding TAVI with the COP approach. The status of PPMI and other clinical events were ascertained at 30 days. RESULTS: A total of 261 patients were included (84% with Evolut, n = 219). Implant depth >4 mm was infrequent (13.8%). TAVI depth (OR 1.259; p = 0.005), first or second-degree auriculo-ventricular block (OR 3.406; p = 0.033), right-bundle (OR 15.477; p < 0.0001), and incomplete left-bundle branch block (OR 7.964; p = 0.036) were found to be independent predictors of PPMI. The risk of PPMI with deep implant and no electrical disturbances was 3%, and 0% with high implant and no prior electrical disturbances. Those who received PPMI had no statistically significant increased risk of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, bleeding events, or vascular complications at 30 days, but longer hospital stay (mean difference 1.43 days more, p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Implant depth and prior conduction abnormalities remain the main predictors of PPMI using self-expanding TAVI in the COP era. Patients with high implants and no prior conduction abnormalities may be candidates for early discharge after uneventful self-expanding TAVI, while the rest may need inpatient monitoring regardless of achieving a high implant. The need for PPMI was associated with longer hospital stays.
RESUMO
Background: Systolic blood pressure amplification (SBPA) and pulse pressure amplification (PPA) can independently predict cardiovascular damage and mortality. A wide range of methods are used for the non-invasive estimation of SBPA and PPA. The most accurate non-invasive method for obtaining SBPA and/or PPA remains unknown. Aim: This study aims to evaluate the agreement between the SBPA and PPA values that are invasively and non-invasively obtained using different (1) measurement sites (radial, brachial, carotid), (2) measuring techniques (tonometry, oscillometry/plethysmography, ultrasound), (3) pulse waveform analysis approaches, and (4) calibration methods [systo-diastolic vs. approaches using brachial diastolic and mean blood pressure (BP)], with the latter calculated using different equations or measured by oscillometry. Methods: Invasive aortic and brachial pressure (catheterism) and non-invasive aortic and peripheral (brachial, radial) BP were simultaneously obtained from 34 subjects using different methodologies, analysis methods, measuring sites, and calibration methods. SBPA and PPA were quantified. Concordance correlation and the Bland-Altman analysis were performed. Results: (1) In general, SBPA and PPA levels obtained with non-invasive approaches were not associated with those recorded invasively. (2) The different non-invasive approaches led to (extremely) dissimilar results. In general, non-invasive measurements underestimated SBPA and PPA; the higher the invasive SBPA (or PPA), the greater the underestimation. (3) None of the calibration schemes, which considered non-invasive brachial BP to estimate SBPA or PPA, were better than the others. (4) SBPA and PPA levels obtained from radial artery waveform analysis (tonometry) (5) and common carotid artery ultrasound recordings and brachial artery waveform analysis, respectively, minimized the mean errors. Conclusions: Overall, the findings showed that (i) SBPA and PPA indices are not "synonymous" and (ii) non-invasive approaches would fail to accurately determine invasive SBPA or PPA levels, regardless of the recording site, analysis, and calibration methods. Non-invasive measurements generally underestimated SBPA and PPA, and the higher the invasive SBPA or PPA, the higher the underestimation. There was not a calibration scheme better than the others. Consequently, our study emphasizes the strong need to be critical of measurement techniques, to have methodological transparency, and to have expert consensus for non-invasive assessment of SBPA and PPA.
RESUMO
RESUMEN Objetivo : Analizar si la estrategia del implante alto usando superposición de las cúspides derechas e izquierdas (Cusp Overlap, COVL) en el implante percutáneo de la válvula aórtica (TAVI) se relaciona con menor incidencia de regurgitación paravalvular (RPV) moderada o grave, comparada con la estrategia convencional (CON). Material y métodos : Se analizaron 206 pacientes consecutivos que recibieron TAVI con válvulas autoexpandidles entre agosto de 2019 y mayo de 2022. Se utilizó una estrategia CON en 101 pacientes (49%) y COVL en 105 (51%). El Punto Final Primario (PFP) fue la presencia de regurgitación paravalvular moderada y grave a 30 días. Resultados : No hubo diferencia clínica entre los grupos en cuanto a la edad media, sexo ni comorbilidades; excepto una tendencia a más diabetes y angioplastia coronaria previa en el grupo COVL. El STS score fue mayor en el grupo de COVL (6,9 ± 2,2 vs. 5,8 ± 2,4 en CON, p = 0,01). A 30 días no hubo diferencia en el PFP (RPV moderada en 2% en CON, y 0,9% en COVL; ninguno presentó RPV grave). Tampoco hubo diferencia en mortalidad, infarto, oclusión coronaria, accidente cerebrovascular, sangrado mayor y complicación vascular. La necesidad de marcapasos definitivo fue menor con la estrategia de COVL (6,7% vs. 17,8%, p = 0,01) y un nuevo bloqueo de rama izquierda ocurrió en 5,7% vs. 12,9% (p = 0,07). Conclusiones : En esta serie de un solo centro, la estrategia del implante alto de la válvula aórtica percutánea usando la técnica de COVL no demostró diferencia en la presencia de regurgitaciones moderadas o graves comparada con la estrategia convencional, sin presentar diferencia en las complicaciones, y se asoció a una menor necesidad de marcapasos definitivo y a una tendencia de menos bloqueos de rama izquierda a 30 días.
ABSTRACT Objective : The aim of this study is to whether higher transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with self-expandable valves using the right and left cusp overlap strategy (Cusp Overlap, COVL) is associated with a lower incidence of moderate or severe paravalvular regurgitation, compared with the conventional strategy (CON). Methods : A total of 206 consecutive patients undergoing TAVI with self-expandable valves between August 2019 and May 2022 were analyzed. The CON technique was used in the first 101 patients (49%) and COVL was used in 105 (51%). The primary endpoint (PEP) was the presence of moderate or severe paravalvular regurgitation at 30 days. Results : There were no clinical differences between the groups in terms of mean age, sex or comorbidities, except for a trend towards more patients with diabetes and previous percutaneous coronary intervention in the COVL group. The STS score was greater in the COVL group (6.9 ± 2.2 vs. 5.8 ± 2.4 in the CON group; p = 0.01). There was no difference in the PEP at 30 days with 2% incidence of moderate PVR in the CON group and 0.9% in the COVL group, and none of them presented severe PVR. There were no differences in mortality, myocardial infarction, coronary artery obstruction, stroke, major bleeding or vascular complications. The need for permanent pacemaker was lower with the COVL strategy (6.7% vs. 17.8%, p = 0.01) and a new left bundle branch block occurred in 5.7% vs. 12.9% (p = 0.07). Conclusions : In this single-center series, the strategy of high transcatheter aortic valve implantation using the COVL strategy showed no difference in the presence of moderate or severe regurgitation compared with the conventional strategy, with no differences in complications, and was associated with a lower need for definitive pacemaker and with a trend towards lower incidence of left bundle branch block at 30 days.
RESUMO
The use of oscillometric methods to determine brachial blood pressure (bBP) can lead to a systematic underestimation of the invasively measured systolic (bSBP) and pulse (bPP) pressure levels, together with a significant overestimation of diastolic pressure (bDBP). Similarly, the agreement between brachial mean blood pressure (bMBP), invasively and non-invasively measured, can be affected by inaccurate estimations/assumptions. Despite several methodologies that can be applied to estimate bMBP non-invasively, there is no consensus on which approach leads to the most accurate estimation. Aims: to evaluate the association and agreement between: (1) non-invasive (oscillometry) and invasive bBP; (2) invasive bMBP, and bMBP (i) measured by oscillometry and (ii) calculated using six different equations; and (3) bSBP and bPP invasively and non-invasively obtained by applanation tonometry and employing different calibration methods. To this end, invasive aortic blood pressure and bBP (catheterization), and non-invasive bBP (oscillometry [Mobil-O-Graph] and brachial artery applanation tonometry [SphygmoCor]) were simultaneously obtained (34 subjects, 193 records). bMBP was calculated using different approaches. Results: (i) the agreement between invasive bBP and their respective non-invasive measurements (oscillometry) showed dependence on bBP levels (proportional error); (ii) among the different approaches used to obtain bMBP, the equation that includes a form factor equal to 33% (bMBP = bDBP + bPP/3) showed the best association with the invasive bMBP; (iii) the best approach to estimate invasive bSBP and bPP from tonometry recordings is based on the calibration scheme that employs oscillometric bMBP. On the contrary, the worst association between invasive and applanation tonometry-derived bBP levels was observed when the brachial pulse waveform was calibrated to bMBP quantified as bMBP = bDBP + bPP/3. Our study strongly emphasizes the need for methodological transparency and consensus for non-invasive bMBP assessment.
RESUMO
Background: The non-invasive estimation of aortic systolic (aoSBP) and pulse pressure (aoPP) is achieved by a great variety of devices, which differ markedly in the: 1) principles of recording (applied technology), 2) arterial recording site, 3) model and mathematical analysis applied to signals, and/or 4) calibration scheme. The most reliable non-invasive procedure to obtain aoSBP and aoPP is not well established. Aim: To evaluate the agreement between aoSBP and aoPP values invasively and non-invasively obtained using different: 1) recording techniques (tonometry, oscilometry/plethysmography, ultrasound), 2) recording sites [radial, brachial (BA) and carotid artery (CCA)], 3) waveform analysis algorithms (e.g., direct analysis of the CCA pulse waveform vs. peripheral waveform analysis using general transfer functions, N-point moving average filters, etc.), 4) calibration schemes (systolic-diastolic calibration vs. methods using BA diastolic and mean blood pressure (bMBP); the latter calculated using different equations vs. measured directly by oscillometry, and 5) different equations to estimate bMBP (i.e., using a form factor of 33% ("033"), 41.2% ("0412") or 33% corrected for heart rate ("033HR"). Methods: The invasive aortic (aoBP) and brachial pressure (bBP) (catheterization), and the non-invasive aoBP and bBP were simultaneously obtained in 34 subjects. Non-invasive aoBP levels were obtained using different techniques, analysis methods, recording sites, and calibration schemes. Results: 1) Overall, non-invasive approaches yielded lower aoSBP and aoPP levels than those recorded invasively. 2) aoSBP and aoPP determinations based on CCA recordings, followed by BA recordings, were those that yielded values closest to those recorded invasively. 3) The "033HR" and "0412" calibration schemes ensured the lowest mean error, and the "033" method determined aoBP levels furthest from those recorded invasively. 4) Most of the non-invasive approaches considered overestimated and underestimated aoSBP at low (i.e., 80 mmHg) and high (i.e., 180 mmHg) invasive aoSBP values, respectively. 5) The higher the invasively measured aoPP, the higher the level of underestimation provided by the non-invasive methods. Conclusion: The recording method and site, the mathematical method/model used to quantify aoSBP and aoPP, and to calibrate waveforms, are essential when estimating aoBP. Our study strongly emphasizes the need for methodological transparency and consensus for the non-invasive aoBP assessment.
RESUMO
RESUMEN Objetivo: Analizar si el implante más alto en el implante percutáneo de válvula aórtica (TAVI) con válvulas auto-expandibles utilizando la superposición de las cúspides derecha e izquierda disminuye la necesidad de marcapasos definitivo. Material y Métodos: Se analizaron 164 pacientes consecutivos que recibieron TAVI con válvulas auto- expandibles; en 101(61,6%) de ellos se implantaron utilizando la vista coplanar de las tres cúspides, a la cual llamamos técnica convencional (CON) y en 63 (38,4%) utilizamos la técnica COVL, con superposición de las cúspides derecha e izquierda . El punto final primario (PFP) fue la necesidad de marcapasos definitivo (MCPD) a 30 días. Resultado: No hubo diferencias entre los grupos en la edad media, prevalencia de sexo masculino, hipertensión, cirugía de revascularización previa, antecedente de accidente cerebrovascular (ACV), función renal, o hemodiálisis. Los pacientes en el grupo COVL tuvieron más diabetes, angioplastia coronaria (ATC) e infarto previos. La ATC pre-TAVI fue similar, con mayor score STS (6,3 ± 2,1 vs. 5,8 ± 2,4; p = 0,05). La presencia de fibrilación auricular fue mayor en el grupo COVL sin diferencia en bloqueo auriculoventricular, de rama derecha o izquierda. No hubo diferencia en el área valvular aórtica, gradiente medio y fracción de eyección ventricular izquierda. A 30 días se observó una reducción significativa del PFP en la estrategia COVL, (6,3% vs 17,8%, p = 0,03). No hubo diferencia en mortalidad, ACV, sangrado mayor, infarto agudo de miocardio o regurgitación aórtica. Hubo tendencia a menor presencia de nuevo bloqueo competo de rama izquierda en el grupo COVL (4,8% vs. 12,9%, p = 0,08). Conclusiones: El uso de la técnica de COVL, que permite un implante más alto en el TAVI con válvulas autoexpandibles, demostró en esta serie ser factible y seguro, con disminución de la necesidad de MCPD sin aumento de las complicaciones.
ABSTRACT Objective: The aim of this study was to analyze whether higher transcatheter aortic valve implantation with self-expandable valves using the right and left cusp overlap strategy decreases the need for permanent pacemaker. Methods: A total of 164 consecutive patients undergoing TAVI with self-expandable valves were analyzed: 101 (61.6%) implanted with the conventional technique (CON) using the three-cusp coplanar view, and 63 (38.4%) using the right and left cusp overlap (COVL) technique. The primary endpoint (PEP) was the need for permanent pacemaker (PPM) at 30 days. Results: Mean age, prevalence of male gender, hypertension, prior coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG), and history of stroke, kidney function or hemodialysis was not different between groups. Patients in the COVL group had more diabetes, coronary percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) and prior infarct, and pre-TAVI PTCA was similar, with higher STS score (6.3±2.2 vs. 5.8±2.4; p=0.05). The presence of atrial fibrillation was greater in the COVL group, without differences in right or left bundle branch or atrioventricular block. There was no difference in aortic valve area, mean gradient and left ventricular ejection fraction. At 30 days, the need of PPM was significantly reduced with the COVL technique (6.3%% vs. 17.8%; p=0.03). No difference was observed in mortality, stroke, major bleeding, acute myocardial infarction or aortic regurgitation, and the presence of new-onset complete left bundle branch block was lower in the COVL group (4.8% vs. 12.9%; p=0.08). Conclusions: Use of the COVL technique, which allows higher self-expandable valve implantation during TAVI, was feasible and safe, decreasing the need for PPM without increasing complications.
RESUMO
RESUMEN Introducción: La endocarditis infecciosa (EI) post implante percutáneo de válvula aórtica (TAVI) es poco frecuente, con una alta tasa de morbimortalidad. Métodos: Se analizaron 630 pacientes consecutivos con TAVI, de los cuales 6 (0,95%) presentaron EI. Resultados: Cuatro eran hombres, edad 81,3 ± 2,2 años, y todos sintomáticos. La fracción de eyección ventricular izquierda (FEVI) fue 56,8 ± 5,3%. Todos recibieron un implante exitoso y uno presentó regurgitación moderada. Dos requirieron marcapaso definitivo, a uno de ellos se le debió recolocar el cable a las 24 hs. La EI se presentó a los 63,5 ± 73,3 días (mediana de 35 días). El germen aislado fue un coco (+) en cuatro casos. En uno se observó una vegetación en el ecocardiograma transesofágico. Un paciente falleció dentro de los 30 días. El seguimiento fue a 23 ± 22 meses, ningún paciente presentó nuevos eventos o internaciones. En el eco Doppler la FEVI fue de 55,9 ± 4,6%, el gradiente medio 8,2 ± 1,8 mmHg y la velocidad pico de 1,8 ± 0,2 m/seg. Un paciente terminó una regurgitación moderada. Conclusiones: En esta serie de pacientes, la EI post TAVI fue poco frecuente y presentó una evolución favorable con el tratamiento antibiótico.
ABSTRACT Background: Infective endocarditis (IE) after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a rare complication with high morbidity and mortality. Methods: Of 630 consecutive patients undergoing TAVI, 6 (0.95%) presented IE. Results: Four patients were men, mean age was 81.3 ± 2.2 years and all the patients were symptomatic. Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was 56.8 ± 5.3%. The procedure was successful in all the patients and one presented moderate regurgitation. Two patients required definitive pacemaker and the lead had to be reimplanted 24 hours later in 1 patient. Time to IE was 63.5 ± 73.3 days (median 35 days). A Gram-positive coccus was isolated in four cases. One patient presented a vegetation on transesophagic echocardiography. One patient died within 30 days. During follow-up of 23 ± 22 months none of the patients presented new events or hospitalizations. On Doppler echocardiography, LVEF was 55.9 ± 4.6%, mean trans-aortic gradient was 8.2 ± 1.8 mm Hg and peak systolic velocity was 1.8 ± 0.2 m/s. One patient had moderate regurgitation. Conclusions: In this series of patients, IE after TAVI was uncommon and had a favorable course with antibiotic treatment.
RESUMO
Cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV) after heart transplantation is a fibro-proliferative process affecting coronary arteries of the graft in up to 46.8% of the cases during the first 10 years post-transplantation. It is one of the main causes of graft loss and death. Due to graft denervation, CAV causing ischemia is usually clinically silent until the disease is far advanced. In this study, we compared coronary angiography with intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) for CAV detection. OUTCOMES: A total of 114 patients with HTx who underwent coronary angiography and IVUS between March 2018 and March 2019 were included. Mean follow-up was 87 ± 61 month. Lesions documented by coronary angiography were found in only 27 (24%) of the 114 patients. IVUS revealed ISHLT CAV 0 in 87 patients (76.3%); ISHLT CAV1 in 15 (13,1%) and ISHLT CAV2 and CAV3 in 6 patients (5.2%) each. Among 328 IVUS images, maximum intimal thickness (MIT) >0.5 mm was obtained in 60 vessels (52%) with 24 patients having three-vessel and 19 two-vessel involvement. CONCLUSION: As an adjunct to conventional coronary angiography to detect angiographically silent CAV in heart transplant patients, IVUS is a reliable and safe technique with a low complication rate. Large multicenter studies are necessary to confirm these findings and the potential long-term clinical impact of early detection in clinically and angiographically silent phase.