Citations

Coexistence of end‐stage liver disease (ESLD) and severe valvular heart disease conveyed substantial risk for patients, oftentimes leading to exclusion from liver transplantation candidacy due to inability to safely offer cardiac surgery prior to transplantation. Several approaches have been described, including performing transplantation and valve surgery concurrently, or in sequence. Both options, however, have associated complications: catastrophic repercussion of peri‐operative coagulopathy and organ dysfunction post‐transplantation, respectively. The introduction of transcatheter procedures offered a safer alternative for high‐risk patients; however, its recognized indications remained limited. A novel approach to this surgical dilemma by performing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) for severe native aortic valve regurgitation in a patient on the liver transplant list has been presented. The procedure proved to be an effective management for the aortic valve insufficiency, improving our patient's hemodynamics in preparation for the subsequent orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT). © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

ObjectiveTo describe the effects of percutaneously implanted valve‐in‐valve in the tricuspid position for patients with pre‐existing transvalvular device leads.MethodsIn this case series, we describe implantation of the Melody valve and SAPIEN XT valve within dysfunctional bioprosthetic tricuspid valves in three patients with transvalvular device leads.ResultsIn all cases, the valve was successfully deployed and device lead function remained unchanged. In 1/3 cases with 6‐month follow‐up, device lead parameters remain unchanged and transcatheter valve‐in‐valve function remains satisfactory.ConclusionsTranscatheter tricuspid valve‐in‐valve is feasible in patients with pre‐existing transvalvular devices leads. Further study is required to determine the long‐term clinical implications of this treatment approach. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Background— In asymptomatic patients with severe aortic stenosis, guidelines recommend left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of <50% as the threshold for referral for aortic valve replacement. We investigated the importance of LVEF on long-term outcome after aortic valve replacement in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients with severe aortic stenosis. Methods and Results— We retrospectively identified 2017 patients with severe aortic stenosis (aortic valve area<1 cm 2 , mean gradient≥40 mm Hg, or indexed aortic valve area<0.6 cm 2 /m 2 ) who underwent surgical aortic valve replacement from January 1995 to June 2009. Patients were divided into 4 groups depending on preoperative LVEF (<50% in 300 [15%] patients, 50%–59% in 331 [17%], 60%–69% in 908 [45%], and ≥70% in 478 [24%]). During follow-up of 5.3±4.4 years, 1056 (52%) patients died. A decrease in mortality was observed with increasing LVEF, P <0.0001; 5-year mortality estimates (95% confidence interval) were 0.41 (0.35–0.47), LVEF<50%; 0.35 (0.29–0.41), LVEF 50% to 59%; 0.26 (0.23–0.29), LVEF 60% to 69%; and 0.22 (0.18–0.26), LVEF≥70%. Compared with patients with LVEF≥60%, patients with LVEF 50% to 59% had increased mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 1.58; P <0.001), with similar risk increase in both symptomatic (HR, 1.56; P <0.001) and asymptomatic patients (HR, 1.58; P =0.006). Correcting for risk factors, LV mass index, aortic valve area, and stroke volume index, LVEF was independently predictive of mortality (HR, 0.88 per 10%; P <0.001). When this analysis was repeated in the subset of 1333 patients without history of coronary artery disease, LVEF remained associated with mortality (HR, 0.90 per 10%; P =0.009). Conclusions— LVEF is a powerful predictor of outcome in patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing aortic valve replacement, independent of the presence of valve-related symptoms.

In this report, we describe the case of a 41‐year‐old man with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy presenting with right‐sided congestive heart failure symptoms. Noninvasive testing was suggestive, but non‐diagnostic for constrictive pericarditis (CP) and thus invasive hemodynamic catheterization was performed. The unique presence of both hypertrophic cardiomyopathy and constriction in this case led to lack of “modern” echocardiographic and invasive criteria for CP, based upon findings of enhanced ventricular dependence. However, classic hemodynamic criteria of early rapid filling with elevation and end‐equalization of diastolic pressures were present, and the patient ultimately received pericardiectomy with dramatic clinical improvement. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Background— Spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD) is a nonatherosclerotic acute coronary syndrome for which optimal management remains undefined. Methods and Results— We performed a retrospective study of 189 patients presenting with a first SCAD episode. We evaluated outcomes according to initial management: (1) revascularization versus conservative therapy and (2) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) versus conservative therapy stratified by vessel flow at presentation. Demographics were similar in revascularization versus conservative (mean age, 44±9 years; women 92% both groups), but vessel occlusion was more frequent in revascularization (44/95 versus 18/94). There was 1 in-hospital death (revascularization) and 1 late death (conservative). Procedural failure rate was 53% in those managed with PCI. In the subgroup of patients presenting with preserved vessel flow, rates of PCI failure were similarly high (50%), and 6 (13%) required emergency coronary artery bypass grafting. In the conservative group, 85 of 94 (90%) had an uneventful in-hospital course, but 9 (10%) experienced early SCAD progression requiring revascularization. Kaplan–Meier estimated 5-year rates of target vessel revascularization and recurrent SCAD were no different in revascularization versus conservative therapy (30% versus 19%; P =0.06 and 23% versus 31%; P =0.7). Conclusions— PCI for SCAD is associated with high rates of technical failure even in those presenting with preserved vessel flow and does not protect against target vessel revascularization or recurrent SCAD. A strategy of conservative management with prolonged observation may be preferable.

Background— Spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD) is an increasingly recognized nonatherosclerotic cause of acute coronary syndrome. The angiographic characteristics of SCAD are largely undetermined. The goal of this study was to determine the prevalence of coronary tortuosity in SCAD and whether it may be implicated in the disease. Methods and Results— Patients with confirmed SCAD (n=246; 45.3±8.9 years; 96% women) and 313 control patients without SCAD or coronary artery disease who underwent coronary angiography were included in this case–control study. Angiograms were reviewed for coronary tortuosity and assigned a tortuosity score. Tortuosity was common in patients presenting with their first SCAD event (78% versus 17% in controls; P <0.0001; tortuosity score, 4.41±1.73 versus 2.33±1.49 in controls; P <0.0001) despite a low prevalence of hypertension (34%). Recurrent SCAD (n=40) occurred within segments of tortuosity in 80% of cases. Severe tortuosity (≥2 consecutive curvatures ≥180°) was associated with a higher risk of recurrent SCAD (hazard ratio, 3.29; 95% confidence interval, 0.99–8.29; P =0.05). Tortuosity score >5 was associated with a trend toward higher risk of recurrent SCAD ( P =0.16). Prespecified angiographic markers of tortuosity including corkscrew appearance and multivessel symmetrical tortuosity were associated with extracoronary vasculopathy including fibromuscular dysplasia ( P <0.05 for both). Conclusions— Coronary artery tortuosity is highly prevalent in the SCAD population and is associated with recurrent SCAD. Recurrent SCAD most often occurs within segments of tortuosity. Angiographic features of SCAD are associated with extracoronary vasculopathy, including fibromuscular dysplasia. These findings suggest that coronary tortuosity may serve as a marker or potential mechanism for SCAD.