-
Cardiovascular Research Jul 2023Although evidence indicates the association of lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] with atherosclerosis, the link with calcific aortic valve disease (CAVD) is unclear. This... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Although evidence indicates the association of lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] with atherosclerosis, the link with calcific aortic valve disease (CAVD) is unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis explores the connection between Lp(a) and aortic valve calcification and stenosis (AVS). We included all relevant studies, indexed in eight databases, up to February 2023. A total of 44 studies (163 139 subjects) were included, with 16 of them being further meta-analysed. Despite considerable heterogeneity, most studies support the relationship between Lp(a) and CAVD, especially in younger populations, with evidence of early aortic valve micro-calcification in elevated-Lp(a) populations. The quantitative synthesis showed higher Lp(a) levels, by 22.63 nmol/L (95% CI: 9.98-35.27), for patients with AVS, while meta-regressing the data revealed smaller Lp(a) differences for older populations with a higher proportion of females. The meta-analysis of eight studies providing genetic data, revealed that the minor alleles of both rs10455872 and rs3798220 LPA gene loci were associated with higher risk for AVS (pooled odds ratio 1.42; 95% CI: 1.34-1.50 and 1.27; 95% CI: 1.09-1.48, respectively). Importantly, high-Lp(a) individuals displayed not only faster AVS progression, by a mean difference of 0.09 m/s/year (95% CI: 0.09-0.09), but also a higher risk of serious adverse outcomes, including death (pooled hazard ratio 1.39; 95% CI: 1.01-1.90). These summary findings highlight the effect of Lp(a) on CAVD initiation, progression and outcomes, and support the early onset of Lp(a)-related subclinical lesions before clinical evidence.
Topics: Female; Humans; Aortic Valve; Aortic Valve Stenosis; Hyperlipidemias; Lipoprotein(a); Risk Factors
PubMed: 37078819
DOI: 10.1093/cvr/cvad062 -
European Heart Journal Sep 2023Heyde syndrome is the co-occurrence of aortic stenosis, acquired von Willebrand syndrome, and gastrointestinal bleeding. Aortic valve replacement has been demonstrated... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
AIMS
Heyde syndrome is the co-occurrence of aortic stenosis, acquired von Willebrand syndrome, and gastrointestinal bleeding. Aortic valve replacement has been demonstrated to resolve all three associated disorders. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to obtain best estimates of the effect of aortic valve replacement on acquired von Willebrand syndrome and gastrointestinal bleeding.
METHODS AND RESULTS
A literature search was performed to identify articles on Heyde syndrome and aortic valve replacement up to 25 October 2022. Primary outcomes were the proportion of patients with recovery of acquired von Willebrand syndrome within 24 h (T1), 24-72 h (T2), 3-21 days (T3), and 4 weeks to 2 years (T4) after aortic valve replacement and the proportion of patients with cessation of gastrointestinal bleeding. Pooled proportions and risk ratios were calculated using random-effects models. Thirty-three studies (32 observational studies and one randomized controlled trial) on acquired von Willebrand syndrome (n = 1054), and 11 observational studies on gastrointestinal bleeding (n = 300) were identified. One study reported on both associated disorders (n = 6). The pooled proportion of Heyde patients with acquired von Willebrand syndrome recovery was 86% (95% CI, 79%-91%) at T1, 90% (74%-96%) at T2, 92% (84%-96%) at T3, and 87% (67%-96%) at T4. The pooled proportion of Heyde patients with gastrointestinal bleeding cessation was 73% (62%-81%). Residual aortic valve disease was associated with lower recovery rates of acquired von Willebrand syndrome (RR 0.20; 0.05-0.72; P = 0.014) and gastrointestinal bleeding (RR 0.57; 0.40-0.81; P = 0.002).
CONCLUSION
Aortic valve replacement is associated with rapid recovery of the bleeding diathesis in Heyde syndrome and gastrointestinal bleeding cessation. Residual valve disease compromises clinical benefits.
Topics: Humans; Aortic Valve; Angiodysplasia; Aortic Valve Stenosis; von Willebrand Diseases; Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage; Syndrome; von Willebrand Factor
PubMed: 37555393
DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehad340 -
European Heart Journal Sep 2023To support decision-making in children undergoing aortic valve replacement (AVR), by providing a comprehensive overview of published outcomes after paediatric AVR, and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
AIMS
To support decision-making in children undergoing aortic valve replacement (AVR), by providing a comprehensive overview of published outcomes after paediatric AVR, and microsimulation-based age-specific estimates of outcome with different valve substitutes.
METHODS AND RESULTS
A systematic review of published literature reporting clinical outcome after paediatric AVR (mean age <18 years) published between 1/1/1990 and 11/08/2021 was conducted. Publications reporting outcome after paediatric Ross procedure, mechanical AVR (mAVR), homograft AVR (hAVR), and/or bioprosthetic AVR were considered for inclusion. Early risks (<30d), late event rates (>30d) and time-to-event data were pooled and entered into a microsimulation model. Sixty-eight studies, of which one prospective and 67 retrospective cohort studies, were included, encompassing a total of 5259 patients (37 435 patient-years; median follow-up: 5.9 years; range 1-21 years). Pooled mean age for the Ross procedure, mAVR, and hAVR was 9.2 ± 5.6, 13.0 ± 3.4, and 8.4 ± 5.4 years, respectively. Pooled early mortality for the Ross procedure, mAVR, and hAVR was 3.7% (95% CI, 3.0%-4.7%), 7.0% (5.1%-9.6%), and 10.6% (6.6%-17.0%), respectively, and late mortality rate was 0.5%/year (0.4%-0.7%/year), 1.0%/year (0.6%-1.5%/year), and 1.4%/year (0.8%-2.5%/year), respectively. Microsimulation-based mean life-expectancy in the first 20 years was 18.9 years (18.6-19.1 years) after Ross (relative life-expectancy: 94.8%) and 17.0 years (16.5-17.6 years) after mAVR (relative life-expectancy: 86.3%). Microsimulation-based 20-year risk of aortic valve reintervention was 42.0% (95% CI: 39.6%-44.6%) after Ross and 17.8% (95% CI: 17.0%-19.4%) after mAVR.
CONCLUSION
Results of paediatric AVR are currently suboptimal with substantial mortality especially in the very young with considerable reintervention hazards for all valve substitutes, but the Ross procedure provides a survival benefit over mAVR. Pros and cons of substitutes should be carefully weighed during paediatric valve selection.
Topics: Humans; Child; Adolescent; Aortic Valve; Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation; Retrospective Studies; Prospective Studies; Heart Valve Prosthesis; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37366156
DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehad370 -
Cureus Nov 2023Aortic valve replacement (AVR) successfully treats aortic valve stenosis and aortic regurgitation from aging or bicuspid aortic valves. The procedure intends to restore... (Review)
Review
Aortic valve replacement (AVR) successfully treats aortic valve stenosis and aortic regurgitation from aging or bicuspid aortic valves. The procedure intends to restore the obstructed left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT). AVR can be performed surgically (surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR); open heart) or via transcatheter (transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR)), typically done through a femoral approach as a minimally invasive procedure, allowing for quicker recovery and reduced hospital stays. AVR has many complications, including life-threatening ones, such as infective endocarditis (IE), retarding the recovery process and increasing mortality following surgery. IE is an uncommon and deadly condition that involves multiple organ systems and is caused by bacteremia stemming from a microorganism that enters the bloodstream. Many manifestations are involved in the development of IE, such as fevers, flu-like symptoms, splinter hemorrhages, Osler nodes, abscesses, and vegetations found on the valves at the leaflets. Vegetations and abscesses tend to create further complications, such as stroke and acute kidney injury, as emboli block blood flow, leading to ischemia and damage. This paper aims to evaluate the difference in SAVR- and TAVR-associated IE, as the goal is to elucidate a danger that diminishes the positive effects of either procedure despite its rarity. Studies have been inconclusive in determining whether or not there is a trend, let alone a difference in incident rates. Both procedures share similar risk factors, but SAVR-associated IE is usually caused by and studies indicate possibly in TAVR-associated IE. Incident rates of IE are much higher than they should be, whether or not they differ between procedures, and future research needs to consider the pathways and risk factors that can be used to reduce the occurrence of AVR-associated IE.
PubMed: 38116334
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.49048 -
European Journal of Cardio-thoracic... Sep 2023To support clinical decision-making in children with aortic valve disease, by compiling the available evidence on outcome after paediatric aortic valve repair (AVr). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
To support clinical decision-making in children with aortic valve disease, by compiling the available evidence on outcome after paediatric aortic valve repair (AVr).
METHODS
A systematic review of literature reporting clinical outcome after paediatric AVr (mean age at surgery <18 years) published between 1 January 1990 and 23 December 2021 was conducted. Early event risks, late event rates and time-to-event data were pooled. A microsimulation model was employed to simulate the lives of individual children, infants and neonates following AVr.
RESULTS
Forty-one publications were included, encompassing 2 623 patients with 17 217 patient-years of follow-up (median follow-up: 7.3 years; range: 1.0-14.4 years). Pooled mean age during repair for aortic stenosis in children (<18 years), infants (<1 year) or neonates (<30 days) was 5.2 ± 3.9 years, 35 ± 137 days and 11 ± 6 days, respectively. Pooled early mortality after stenosis repair in children, infants and neonates, respectively, was 3.5% (95% confidence interval: 1.9-6.5%), 7.4% (4.2-13.0%) and 10.7% (6.8-16.9%). Pooled late reintervention rate after stenosis repair in children, infants and neonates, respectively, was 3.31%/year (1.66-6.63%/year), 6.84%/year (3.95-11.83%/year) and 6.32%/year (3.04-13.15%/year); endocarditis 0.07%/year (0.03-0.21%/year), 0.23%/year (0.07-0.71%/year) and 0.49%/year (0.18-1.29%/year); and valve thrombosis 0.05%/year (0.01-0.26%/year), 0.15%/year (0.04-0.53%/year) and 0.19%/year (0.05-0.77%/year). Microsimulation-based mean life expectancy in the first 20 years for children, infants and neonates with aortic stenosis, respectively, was 18.4 years (95% credible interval: 18.1-18.7 years; relative survival compared to the matched general population: 92.2%), 16.8 years (16.5-17.0 years; relative survival: 84.2%) and 15.9 years (14.8-17.0 years; relative survival: 80.1%). Microsimulation-based 20-year risk of reintervention in children, infants and neonates, respectively, was 75.2% (72.9-77.2%), 53.8% (51.9-55.7%) and 50.8% (47.0-57.6%).
CONCLUSIONS
Long-term outcomes after paediatric AVr for stenosis are satisfactory and dependent on age at surgery. Despite a high hazard of reintervention for valve dysfunction and slightly impaired survival relative to the general population, AVr is associated with low valve-related event occurrences and should be considered in children with aortic valve disease.
Topics: Infant, Newborn; Humans; Child; Infant; Adolescent; Aortic Valve; Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation; Heart Valve Prosthesis; Constriction, Pathologic; Aortic Valve Stenosis; Treatment Outcome; Retrospective Studies; Reoperation
PubMed: 37584683
DOI: 10.1093/ejcts/ezad284 -
European Heart Journal Sep 2023International guidelines recommend screening of first-degree relatives (FDR) of people with bicuspid aortic valves (BAVs). However, the prevalence of BAV and of aortic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
AIMS
International guidelines recommend screening of first-degree relatives (FDR) of people with bicuspid aortic valves (BAVs). However, the prevalence of BAV and of aortic dilatation amongst family members is uncertain.
METHODS AND RESULTS
A systematic review and meta-analysis of original reports of screening for BAV. Databases including MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL were searched from inception to December 2021 using relevant search terms. Data were sought on the screened prevalence of BAV and aortic dilatation. The protocol was specified prior to the searches being performed, and standard meta-analytic techniques were used. Twenty-three observational studies met inclusion criteria (n = 2297 index cases; n = 6054 screened relatives). The prevalence of BAV amongst relatives was 7.3% [95% confidence interval (CI) 6.1%-8.6%] overall and per family was 23.6% (95% CI 18.1%-29.5%). The prevalence of aortic dilatation amongst relatives was 9.4% (95% CI 5.7%-13.9%). Whilst the prevalence of aortic dilatation was particularly high in relatives with BAV (29.2%; 95% CI 15.3%-45.1%), aortic dilatation alongside tricuspid aortic valves was a more frequent finding, as there were many more family members with tricuspid valves than BAV. The prevalence estimate amongst relatives with tricuspid valves (7.0%; 95% CI 3.2%-12.0%) was higher than reported in the general population.
CONCLUSION
Screening family members of people with BAV can identify a cohort substantially enriched for the presence of bicuspid valve, aortic enlargement, or both. The implications for screening programmes are discussed, including in particular the substantial current uncertainties regarding the clinical implications of aortic findings.
Topics: Humans; Bicuspid Aortic Valve Disease; Heart Valve Diseases; Dilatation; Aortic Valve; Aortic Diseases; Dilatation, Pathologic; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 37288540
DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehad320 -
ESC Heart Failure May 2024The efficacy and safety of new-generation devices (NGDs) for severe aortic regurgitation (AR) have mostly been based on single-arm studies with limited sample sizes. Our... (Review)
Review
The efficacy and safety of new-generation devices (NGDs) for severe aortic regurgitation (AR) have mostly been based on single-arm studies with limited sample sizes. Our goal was to summarize the current evidence on NGDs and compare the safety and efficacy of 'off-label' and 'on-label' devices in NGDs. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Scopus for articles on transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients with AR. A total of 31 studies that included 1851 patients were identified through April 2023. Among these, 1067 (57.6%) patients received treatment with 'on-label' devices (JenaValve and J-Valve). For NGDs, the total device success rate at 30 days was 94.5% (on-label: 97.8%, off-label: 89.9%; P < 0.001), the all-cause mortality was 4.2% (on-label: 2.6%, off-label: 5.1%; P = 0.006), permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) was 8.8% (on-label: 6.9%, off-label: 18.4%; P < 0.001), and the rate of greater-than-mild paravalvular leak (PVL) was 1.2% (on-label: 0.9%, off-label: 3.8%; P = 0.003). On-label devices showed significantly better safety and efficacy in terms of the success rate, PPI, greater-than-mild PVL, and 30 day mortality than off-label devices.
PubMed: 38749505
DOI: 10.1002/ehf2.14832 -
Anatolian Journal of Cardiology Nov 2023Perfect heart valve prostheses have optimized hemodynamics, reduced surgical morbidity, long-lasting durability, and extended patient survival with greater quality of... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Perfect heart valve prostheses have optimized hemodynamics, reduced surgical morbidity, long-lasting durability, and extended patient survival with greater quality of life. Mechanical valves are recommended; however, young children may need anticoagulant medication for life. In this study, we looked at the success rate and viability of aortic valve neocuspidization (AVNeo) surgery for a variety of aortic disorders.
METHODS
A methodical search strategy was used to fully evaluate the AVNeo results. Boolean operators were used to combine important words like 'Ozaki Procedure,' 'Aortic Valve Neocuspidization,' 'AVNeo,' and associated terms. Reputable databases such as PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus were the focus of our search. Study quality was assessed using a critical evaluation created with the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme tool.
RESULTS
The findings are summarized in the 'Results' section that contains descriptive and critical analysis, ramifications, and explanations. According to research, AVNeo improved valve function and had few side effects. Aortic valve neocuspidization has a lower mean pressure gradient and a larger mean efficient orifice area than Trifecta. Aortic valve neocuspidization surgery reduces aortic valve regurgitation and pressure gradients. Postoperative echocardiograms indicated a decrease in peak and a rise in mean pressure gradient.
CONCLUSION
The Ozaki method restores a healthy laminar flow pattern while preventing bivalvular disease. Ozaki procedure should be explored for valve repair in infants with truncal valve and congenital aortic disease. Aortic valve tricuspidization with glutaraldehyde-treated autologous pericardium results in considerable effective orifice area, modest pressure gradients, and little regurgitation.
Topics: Child; Humans; Child, Preschool; Aortic Valve; Quality of Life; Aortic Valve Stenosis; Aortic Valve Insufficiency; Heart Valve Prosthesis; Pericardium; Aortic Diseases; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37909351
DOI: 10.14744/AnatolJCardiol.2023.3477 -
Annals of Medicine and Surgery (2012) Sep 2023The study aims to discuss the assessment methods used for the incidence of in-hospital postoperative delirium (IHPOD) in transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR)... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
The study aims to discuss the assessment methods used for the incidence of in-hospital postoperative delirium (IHPOD) in transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) patients and explore possible strategies for preventing and reducing postoperative complications in the geriatric population.
METHODOLOGY
An electronic search of PubMed, Embase, BioMedCentral, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials was conducted up to August 2021, to identify studies on the IHPOD following TAVR in patients above 70 years. The primary objective of the study was to determine the incidence of delirium following TAVR and procedures like transfemoral (TF) and non-TF approaches. The secondary objectives were to determine the incidence of stroke and incidence according to the confusion assessment method (CAM) diagnostic tool. The authors only included studies published in English and excluded patients with comorbidities and studies with inaccessible full-text.
RESULTS
Among the selected 42 studies with 47 379 patients, the incidence of IHPOD following TAVR was 10.5% (95% CI: 9.2-11.9%, =95.82%, <0.001). Incidence based on CAM was 15.6% (95% CI: 10.5-20.7%, =95.36%, <0.001). The incidence of IHPOD after TF-TAVR was 9.3% (95% CI: 7.6-11.0%, =94.52%, <0.001), and after non-TF TAVI was 25.3% (95% CI: 15.4-35.1%, =92.45%, <0.001). The incidence of stroke was 3.7% (95% CI: 2.9-4.5%, =89.76%, <0.001). Meta-regression analyses between mean age (=0.146), logistic EuroSCORE (=0.099), or percentage of participants treated using the TF approach (=0.276) were nonsignificant while stroke (=0.010) was significant. When considering these variables, the residual heterogeneity remained high indicating that other variables influence the heterogeneity.
CONCLUSION
IHPOD following TAVR was observed in 10.5% of individuals and in 15.6% using CAM. Its incidence was found to be three times higher after non-TF TAVR (25.3%) compared to TF TAVR (9.3%). Stroke showed an incidence of 3.7% after TAVR and was found to be significantly associated with the risk of developing delirium following TAVR. Further studies are needed to evaluate possible causes and risk factors responsible for delirium and to assess the role of anesthesia and cerebral embolic protection in preventing delirium after TAVR.
PubMed: 37663694
DOI: 10.1097/MS9.0000000000001096 -
International Journal of Cardiology.... Aug 2023Antibiotic prophylaxis in bicuspid aortic valve patients is currently a matter of debate. Although it is no longer recommended by international guidelines, some studies... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Antibiotic prophylaxis in bicuspid aortic valve patients is currently a matter of debate. Although it is no longer recommended by international guidelines, some studies indicate a high risk of infective endocarditis. We aim to evaluate the risk of native valve infective endocarditis in bicuspid aortic valve patients and compare to individuals with tricuspid aortic valve.
METHODS
Study search of longitudinal studies regarding infective endocarditis incidence in bicuspid aortic valve patients (compared with tricuspid aortic valve/overall population) was conducted through OVID in the following electronic databases: MEDLINE, CENTRAL, EMBASE; from inception until October 2020. The outcomes of interest were the incidence rate and relative risk of infective endocarditis. The relative risk and incidence rate (number of cases for each 10 000 persons-year) with their 95 % confidence intervals (95 %CI) were estimated using a random effects model meta-analysis. The study protocol was registered at PROSPERO CRD42020218639.
RESULTS
Eight cohort studies were selected, with a total of 5351 bicuspid aortic valve patients. During follow up, 184 bicuspid aortic valve patients presented infective endocarditis, with an incidence rate of 48.13 per 10,000 patients-year (95 %CI 22.24-74.02), and a 12-fold (RR: 12.03, 95 %CI 5.45-26.54) increased risk compared with general population, after adjusted estimates.
CONCLUSIONS
This systematic review and meta-analysis suggests that bicuspid aortic valve patients have a significant high risk of native valve infective endocarditis. Large prospective high-quality studies are required to estimate more accurately the incidence of infective endocarditis, the relative risk and the potential benefit of antibiotic prophylaxis.
PubMed: 37547264
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcha.2023.101249