Rihal, Charanjit S.

AbstractObjectivesWe aimed to investigate the invasive hemodynamic changes with transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR) in patients with severe mitral stenosis due to severe mitral annular calcification.BackgroundThe hemodynamic response to TMVR in patients with mitral stenosis related to degenerative mitral annular calcification has not been fully elucidated.MethodsWe conducted retrospective review of patients who underwent successful transseptal TMVR with balloon‐expandable valves for symptomatic severe mitral stenosis due to mitral annular calcification at our institution between January 2014 and February 2020. Invasive hemodynamic measurements were obtained both before valve implantation (predeployment) and after (postdeployment).ResultsEighteen patients (age 72 ± 10 years, 44% female) were included for the analysis. There was a significant reduction in mean left atrial pressure (23.7 ± 5.6 mmHg versus 20.6 ± 4.8 mmHg; p = .01), left atrial v‐wave (mean 39.3 ± 10.2 mmHg versus 32.9 ± 9.9 mmHg; p = .01), and an increase in systemic mean blood pressure (72.6 mmHg ±11.2 versus 79.5 ± 9.9 mmHg; p = .02) postdeployment compared to predeployment. Patients who had symptom improvement at 30‐day follow‐up tended to have greater reduction in mean left atrial pressure (4.4 ± 4.4 mmHg versus 0.5 ± 5.2 mmHg; p = .16) and v‐wave (8.6 ± 9.0 mmHg versus 0.7 ± 8.4 mmHg; p = .10) compared to those who did not experience improvement of symptoms.ConclusionsTransseptal TMVR for severe mitral stenosis due to mitral annular calcification is associated with reductions in mean left atrial pressure and left atrial v‐wave, and an increase in systemic arterial pressure.

Background: Mitral valve-in-valve (ViV) and valve-in-ring (ViR) are alternatives to surgical reoperation in patients with recurrent mitral valve failure after previous surgical valve repair or replacement. Our aim was to perform a large-scale analysis examining midterm outcomes after mitral ViV and ViR. Methods: Patients undergoing mitral ViV and ViR were enrolled in the Valve-in-Valve International Data Registry. Cases were performed between March 2006 and March 2020. Clinical endpoints are reported according to the Mitral Valve Academic Research Consortium (MVARC) definitions. Significant residual mitral stenosis (MS) was defined as mean gradient ≥10 mm Hg and significant residual mitral regurgitation (MR) as ≥ moderate. Results: A total of 1079 patients (857 ViV, 222 ViR; mean age 73.5±12.5 years; 40.8% male) from 90 centers were included. Median STS-PROM score 8.6%; median clinical follow-up 492 days (interquartile range, 76–996); median echocardiographic follow-up for patients that survived 1 year was 772.5 days (interquartile range, 510–1211.75). Four-year Kaplan-Meier survival rate was 62.5% in ViV versus 49.5% for ViR ( P <0.001). Mean gradient across the mitral valve postprocedure was 5.7±2.8 mm Hg (≥5 mm Hg; 61.4% of patients). Significant residual MS occurred in 8.2% of the ViV and 12.0% of the ViR patients ( P =0.09). Significant residual MR was more common in ViR patients (16.6% versus 3.1%; P <0.001) and was associated with lower survival at 4 years (35.1% versus 61.6%; P =0.02). The rates of Mitral Valve Academic Research Consortium–defined device success were low for both procedures (39.4% total; 32.0% ViR versus 41.3% ViV; P =0.01), mostly related to having postprocedural mean gradient ≥5 mm Hg. Correlates for residual MS were smaller true internal diameter, younger age, and larger body mass index. The only correlate for residual MR was ViR. Significant residual MS (subhazard ratio, 4.67; 95% CI, 1.74–12.56; P =0.002) and significant residual MR (subhazard ratio, 7.88; 95% CI, 2.88–21.53; P <0.001) were both independently associated with repeat mitral valve replacement. Conclusions: Significant residual MS and/or MR were not infrequent after mitral ViV and ViR procedures and were both associated with a need for repeat valve replacement. Strategies to improve postprocedural hemodynamics in mitral ViV and ViR should be further explored.

Background Nationwide studies documenting temporal trends in permanent pacemaker implantation (PPMI) following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are limited. Methods and Results We selected patients who underwent TAVR between 2012 and 2017 in the National Readmission Database. The primary end point was the 6‐year trend in post‐TAVR PPMI at index hospitalization and at 30, 90, and 180 days after discharge. The secondary end point was the association between PPMI and in‐hospital mortality, stroke, cost, length of stay, and disposition. Among the 89 202 patients who underwent TAVR, 77 405 (86.8%) with no prior pacemaker or defibrillator were included. Patients who required PPMI had a higher prevalence of atrial fibrillation (43.6% versus 38.7%, P <0.001) and conduction abnormalities (28.4% versus 15.3%, P <0.001). The incidence of PPMI during index admission increased from 8.7% in 2012 to 13.2% in 2015, and then decreased to 9.6% in 2017. The incidence of inpatient PPMI within 30 days after discharge increased from 0.5% in 2012 to 1.25% in 2017 ( P trend <0.001). Inpatient PPMI beyond 30 days remained rare (<0.5%) during the study period. After risk adjustment, PPMI was not associated with in‐hospital mortality or stroke but was associated with increased nonhome discharge, longer hospitalization, and higher cost. The incremental expenditure associated with post‐TAVR PPMI during index admission increased from $9.6 million to $72.2 million between 2012 and 2017. Conclusions After an upward trend, rates of PPMI after TAVR in the United States stabilized at ~10% in 2016 to 2017, but there was a notable increase in PPMI within 30 days after the index admission. PPMI was not associated with increased in‐hospital morbidity or mortality but led to longer hospitalization, higher cost, and more nonhome discharges.

AbstractTranscatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR) with off‐label use of aortic balloon‐expandable transcatheter heart valves has emerged as a therapeutic option in high‐surgical risk patients with severe mitral annular calcification. Left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) obstruction post valve deployment is a major limitation. We describe a case of septal reduction therapy using radiofrequency ablation (RFA) when established methods of septal reduction were either ineffective or not feasible. RFA permitted successful enlargement of the LVOT area and subsequent TMVR.

AbstractTranscatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR) is emerging as an alternative treatment strategy to surgery for patients with severe mitral annular calcification (MAC) who are not candidates for traditional mitral valve surgery. Paravalvular leak (PVL) is common following TMVR for severe MAC and can lead to heart failure symptoms and/or intravascular hemolysis, the latter of which usually is clinically stable. We report the case of a 67‐year‐old woman with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis and mitral stenosis with MAC in the setting of prior chest irradiation who was treated initially with transcatheter aortic valve replacement followed by TMVR at a later date (Sapien S3 system; Edwards Lifesciences). Immediately following TMVR, she developed acute profound hemolysis which manifested with hemoglobinuria, transfusion‐dependent anemia, and acute renal failure requiring renal replacement therapy. She was treated with post‐dilation balloon valvuloplasty after failed transcatheter PVL closure 10 days following TMVR with resulting improvement in the PVL. The hemolytic anemia resolved and renal function recovered without the need for continued hemodialysis 2 months later and stabilization of glomerular filtration rate at 6 months. This case highlights a potential severe complication of TMVR in MAC and suggests that improvement in hemolysis and late recovery of renal function may occur following treatment of PVL.

AbstractAntegrade transseptal approach was utilized in the first human case of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and in the early phase of TAVR. Various challenges with the antegrade transseptal approach including procedural complexity, need for atrial septal crossing, and potential for injury to the mitral valve apparatus led it to being supplanted by other approaches. These challenges have now largely been mitigated as structural interventionalists routinely perform left atrial procedures. We report a case of antegrade transseptal TAVR using a large bore sheath placed in the mid left ventricle across the mitral orifice to protect the mitral valve apparatus and facilitate valve deployment. An 84‐year‐old man with heart failure symptoms was seen for severe aortic stenosis. The severity of peripheral arterial disease precluded femoral, axillary, carotid, or transcaval routes. After transseptal puncture and creation of an arteriovenous rail, a long 26‐Fr sheath was advanced from the right femoral vein transseptally over the arteriovenous rail, past the mitral valve inflow to the mid left ventricular cavity. The sheath provided a stable platform with stable intraprocedure hemodynamics. Balloon valvuloplasty was performed in an antegrade manner, after which a 29‐mm SAPIEN S3 prosthesis was advanced into the aortic valve position and deployed under rapid pacing. We observed no injury to the mitral leaflets or subvalvular apparatus after the procedure. The antegrade transseptal approach should be revisited as an option for patients at high surgical risk with no other suitable access site. The use of a large bore sheath facilitates this approach.

Structural heart disease (SHD) emergencies include acute deterioration of a stable lesion or development of a new critical lesion. Structural heart disease emergencies can produce heart failure and cardiogenic shock despite preserved systolic function that may not respond to standard medical therapy and typically necessitate surgical or percutaneous intervention. Comprehensive Doppler echocardiography is the initial diagnostic modality of choice to determine the cause and severity of the underlying SHD lesion. Patients with chronic SHD lesions which deteriorate due to intercurrent illness (eg, infection or arrhythmia) may not require urgent intervention, whereas patients with an acute SHD lesion often require definitive therapy. Medical stabilization prior to definitive intervention differs substantially between stenotic lesions (aortic stenosis, mitral stenosis, left ventricular outflow tract obstruction) and regurgitant lesions (aortic regurgitation, mitral regurgitation, ventricular septal defect). Patients with regurgitant lesions typically require aggressive afterload reduction and inotropic support, whereas patients with stenotic lesions may paradoxically require β-blockade and vasoconstrictors. Emergent cardiac surgery for patients with decompensated heart failure or cardiogenic shock carries a substantial mortality risk but may be necessary for patients who are not eligible for catheter-based percutaneous SHD intervention. This review explores initial medical stabilization and subsequent definitive therapy for patients with SHD emergencies.