Prosperi‐Porta, Graeme

Abstract Aims Aortic regurgitation (AR) arises from leaflet disease and/or dilatation of the functional aortic annulus complex. Understanding the mechanisms of AR informs surgical planning of valve and aorta repair. This study investigates the mechanisms, aetiologies, and outcomes of isolated native severe AR in a consecutive cohort of patients. Methods and results Patients with moderate-to-severe (3+)/severe (4+) native valve AR, identified from our institutional echocardiography database (2014–2018), were included. Exclusions were significant concomitant valve disease, endocarditis, or aortic dissection. AR was classified per the El-Khoury system: Type I (normal leaflet motion: Ia–ascending aorta/sinotubular junction dilatation, Ib–aortic root dilation, Ic–aortic annular dilation), Type II (leaflet prolapse), and Type III (leaflet restriction). Valve anatomy and clinical outcomes, including mortality and surgical intervention, were analyzed. Of 282 patients (77.3% male), 58.5% had multiple AR mechanisms. Type II (leaflet prolapse) was most common (48.6%), followed by Type III (36.2%). Bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) represented 35.5% of the population, with leaflet prolapse observed in 72%. Multiple mechanisms were more frequent in BAV (77% vs. 48%, P < 0.001). After a median follow-up of 4.7 years (available for 97.5% of patients), 158 (57.5%) underwent an intervention with 48.7% having an aortic valve repair or valve-sparing aortic root replacement. Conclusion Although leaflet prolapse (Type II) was the pre-dominant AR mechanism, multiple contributing mechanisms were often present, particularly in BAV patients. Aortic valve repair accounted for nearly half of surgical interventions, underscoring the importance of mechanism identification to optimize repair and avoid valve replacement.

Background/Objectives: Atrial fibrillation is a frequent comorbidity amongst patients undergoing mitral valve transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (M-TEER) for mitral regurgitation. Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) can be performed to reduce the risk of stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation. Both procedures require large-bore venous access, transseptal puncture, and real-time imaging of the left atrium. However, limited data exist evaluating the safety and feasibility of concomitant M-TEER and LAAO. Methods: We performed a retrospective review of all concomitant M-TEER and LAAO procedures at our institution between May 2019 and September 2024 to evaluate the safety and feasibility of this approach. Results: Concomitant left atrial appendage occlusion was successful in all 15 patients, requiring an additional 15 min (IQR 11–29) of procedural time. No patients died or had a major vascular complication. Routine transesophageal echocardiography performed within 90 days showed no device related thrombus, and no significant peri-device leak in any patients. Conclusions: Concomitant M-TEER and LAAO are feasible but additional prospective studies or randomized trials are needed to evaluate the potential clinical benefit.

Abstract Aims Aortic stenosis (AS) is a progressive disease predominantly affecting elderly patients that carries significant morbidity and mortality without aortic valve replacement, the only proven treatment. Our objective was to determine the cost-effectiveness of AS screening using transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) in a geriatric population from the perspective of the publicly funded healthcare system in Canada. Methods and results Markov models estimating the cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for AS screening with a one-time TTE were developed. The model included diagnosed and undiagnosed AS health states, hospitalizations, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), and post-TAVR health states. Primary analysis included screening at 70 and 80 years of age with intervention at symptom onset, with scenario analysis included for early intervention at the time of severe asymptomatic AS diagnosis. Monte Carlo simulation of 5000 replications was completed with a lifetime horizon and a 1.5% discount for costs and outcomes.Screening for AS at the age of 70 years was associated with an ICER of $156 722, and screening at 80 years of age was associated with an ICER of $28 005, suggesting that screening at 80 years of age is cost-effective when willingness-to-pay per QALY is $50 000. Scenario analysis with early intervention was not cost-effective, with an ICER of $142 157 at 70 years and $124 651 at 80 years. Conclusion Screening for AS at 80 years of age with a one-time TTE, in a Canadian population, improves quality of life and is cost-effective in a publicly funded healthcare system providing, TAVR is reserved for symptomatic patients.

OBJECTIVES: Inotropic support is commonly used in patients with cardiogenic shock (CS). High-quality data guiding the use of dobutamine or milrinone among this patient population is limited. We compared the efficacy and safety of these two inotropes among patients with low cardiac output states (LCOS) or CS. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched up to February 1, 2023, using key terms and index headings related to LCOS or CS and inotropes. DATA EXTRACTION: Two independent reviewers included studies that compared dobutamine to milrinone on all-cause in-hospital mortality, length of ICU stay, length of hospital stay, and significant arrhythmias in hospitalized patients. DATA SYNTHESIS: A total of eleven studies with 21,084 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Only two randomized controlled trials were identified. The primary outcome, all-cause mortality, favored milrinone in observational studies only (odds ratio [OR] 1.19 (95% CI, 1.02–1.39; p = 0.02). In-hospital length of stay (LOS) was reduced with dobutamine in observational studies only (mean difference –1.85 d; 95% CI –3.62 to –0.09; p = 0.04). There was no difference in the prevalence of significant arrhythmias or in ICU LOS. CONCLUSIONS: Only limited data exists supporting the use of one inotropic agent over another exists. Dobutamine may be associated with a shorter hospital LOS; however, there is also a potential for increased all-cause mortality. Larger randomized studies sufficiently powered to detect a difference in these outcomes are required to confirm these findings.