-
Journal of the American College of... Feb 2022Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is a relatively common often inherited global heart disease, with complex phenotypic and genetic expression and natural history,...
Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is a relatively common often inherited global heart disease, with complex phenotypic and genetic expression and natural history, affecting both genders and many races and cultures. Prevalence is 1:200-1:500, largely based on the disease phenotype with imaging, inferring that 750,000 Americans may be affected by HCM. However, cross-sectional data show that only a fraction are clinically diagnosed, suggesting under-recognition, with most clinicians exposed to small segments of the broad disease spectrum. Highly effective HCM management strategies have emerged, altering clinical course and substantially lowering mortality and morbidity rates. These advances underscore the importance of reliable HCM diagnosis with echocardiography and cardiac magnetic resonance. Family screening with noninvasive imaging will identify relatives with the HCM phenotype, while genetic analysis recognizes preclinical sarcomere gene carriers without left ventricular hypertrophy, but with the potential to transmit disease. Comprehensive initial patient evaluations are important for reliable diagnosis, accurate portrayal of HCM and family history, risk stratification, and distinguishing obstructive versus nonobstructive forms.
Topics: Cardiac Imaging Techniques; Cardiomyopathy, Hypertrophic; Humans
PubMed: 35086660
DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2021.12.002 -
Journal of the American College of... Feb 2022Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM), a relatively common, globally distributed, and often inherited primary cardiac disease, has now transformed into a contemporary highly...
Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM), a relatively common, globally distributed, and often inherited primary cardiac disease, has now transformed into a contemporary highly treatable condition with effective options that alter natural history along specific personalized adverse pathways at all ages. HCM patients with disease-related complications benefit from: matured risk stratification in which major markers reliably select patients for prophylactic defibrillators and prevention of arrhythmic sudden death; low risk to high benefit surgical myectomy (with percutaneous alcohol ablation a selective alternative) that reverses progressive heart failure caused by outflow obstruction; anticoagulation prophylaxis that prevents atrial fibrillation-related embolic stroke and ablation techniques that decrease the frequency of paroxysmal episodes; and occasionally, heart transplant for end-stage nonobstructive patients. Those innovations have substantially improved outcomes by significantly reducing morbidity and HCM-related mortality to 0.5%/y. Palliative pharmacological strategies with currently available negative inotropic drugs can control symptoms over the short-term in some patients, but generally do not alter long-term clinical course. Notably, a substantial proportion of HCM patients (largely those identified without outflow obstruction) experience a stable/benign course without major interventions. The expert panel has critically appraised all available data and presented management insights and recommendations with concise principles for clinical decision-making.
Topics: Cardiomyopathy, Hypertrophic; Death, Sudden, Cardiac; Humans
PubMed: 35086661
DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2021.11.021 -
BMJ Open Dec 2021Patients undergoing surgery for severe aortic stenosis (SAS) can be treated with either transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) or surgical aortic valve... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
Patients undergoing surgery for severe aortic stenosis (SAS) can be treated with either transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). The choice of procedure depends on several factors, including the clinical judgement of the heart team and patient preferences, which are captured by actively informing and involving patients in a process of shared decision making (SDM). We synthesised the most up-to-date and accessible evidence on the benefits and risks that may be associated with TAVI versus SAVR to support SDM in this highly personalised decision-making process.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
DATA SOURCES
MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; Wiley) were searched from January 2000 to August 2020 with no language restrictions. Reference lists of included studies were searched to identify additional studies.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared TAVI versus SAVR in patients with SAS and reported on all-cause or cardiovascular mortality, length of stay in intensive care unit or hospital, valve durability, rehospitalisation/reintervention, stroke (any stroke or major/disabling stroke), myocardial infarction, major vascular complications, major bleeding, permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation, new-onset or worsening atrial fibrillation (NOW-AF), endocarditis, acute kidney injury (AKI), recovery time or pain were included.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Two independent reviewers were involved in data extraction and risk of bias (ROB) assessment using the Cochrane tool (one reviewer extracted/assessed the data, and the second reviewer checked it). Dichotomous data were pooled using the Mantel-Haenszel method with random-effects to generate a risk ratio (RR) with 95% CI. Continuous data were pooled using the inverse-variance method with random-effects and expressed as a mean difference (MD) with 95% CI. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I statistic.
RESULTS
8969 records were retrieved and nine RCTs (61 records) were ultimately included (n=8818 participants). Two RCTs recruited high-risk patients, two RCTs recruited intermediate-risk patients, two RCTs recruited low-risk patients, one RCT recruited high-risk (≥70 years) or any-risk (≥80 years) patients; and two RCTs recruited all-risk or 'operable' patients. While there was no overall change in the risk of dying from any cause (30 day: RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.22; ≤1 year: RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.03; 5 years: RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.22), cardiovascular mortality (30 day: RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.39; ≤1 year: RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.06; 2 years: RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.12), or any type of stroke (30 day: RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.14;≤1 year: RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.23; 5 years: RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.30), the risk of several clinical outcomes was significantly decreased (major bleeding, AKI, NOW-AF) or significantly increased (major vascular complications, PPM implantation) for TAVI vs SAVR. TAVI was associated with a significantly shorter hospital stay vs SAVR (MD -3.08 days, 95% CI -4.86 to -1.29; 4 RCTs, n=2758 participants). Subgroup analysis generally favoured TAVI patients receiving implantation via the transfemoral (TF) route (vs non-TF); receiving a balloon-expandable (vs self-expanding) valve; and those at low-intermediate risk (vs high risk). All RCTs were rated at high ROB, predominantly due to lack of blinding and selective reporting.
CONCLUSIONS
No overall change in the risk of death from any cause or cardiovascular mortality was identified but 95% CIs were often wide, indicating uncertainty. TAVI may reduce the risk of certain side effects while SAVR may reduce the risk of others. Most long-term (5-year) results are limited to older patients at high surgical risk (ie, early trials), therefore more data are required for low risk populations. Ultimately, neither surgical technique was considered dominant, and these results suggest that every patient with SAS should be individually engaged in SDM to make evidence-based, personalised decisions around their care based on the various benefits and risks associated with each treatment.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42019138171.
Topics: Aortic Valve; Aortic Valve Stenosis; Heart Valve Prosthesis; Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation; Humans; Risk Factors; Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34873012
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-054222 -
European Heart Journal Oct 2019Owing to new evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in low-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis, we compared the collective safety and efficacy of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
AIMS
Owing to new evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in low-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis, we compared the collective safety and efficacy of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) vs. surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) across the entire spectrum of surgical risk patients.
METHODS AND RESULTS
The meta-analysis is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42016037273). We identified RCTs comparing TAVI with SAVR in patients with severe aortic stenosis reporting at different follow-up periods. We extracted trial, patient, intervention, and outcome characteristics following predefined criteria. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality up to 2 years for the main analysis. Seven trials that randomly assigned 8020 participants to TAVI (4014 patients) and SAVR (4006 patients) were included. The combined mean STS score in the TAVI arm was 9.4%, 5.1%, and 2.0% for high-, intermediate-, and low surgical risk trials, respectively. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation was associated with a significant reduction of all-cause mortality compared to SAVR {hazard ratio [HR] 0.88 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78-0.99], P = 0.030}; an effect that was consistent across the entire spectrum of surgical risk (P-for-interaction = 0.410) and irrespective of type of transcatheter heart valve (THV) system (P-for-interaction = 0.674). Transcatheter aortic valve implantation resulted in lower risk of strokes [HR 0.81 (95% CI 0.68-0.98), P = 0.028]. Surgical aortic valve replacement was associated with a lower risk of major vascular complications [HR 1.99 (95% CI 1.34-2.93), P = 0.001] and permanent pacemaker implantations [HR 2.27 (95% CI 1.47-3.64), P < 0.001] compared to TAVI.
CONCLUSION
Compared with SAVR, TAVI is associated with reduction in all-cause mortality and stroke up to 2 years irrespective of baseline surgical risk and type of THV system.
Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Aortic Valve; Aortic Valve Stenosis; Female; Heart Valve Prosthesis; Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation; Humans; Male; Postoperative Complications; Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement
PubMed: 31329852
DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehz275 -
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 -
JACC. Cardiovascular Imaging Mar 2023Aortic valve stenosis is a progressive disorder with variable progression rates. The factors affecting aortic stenosis (AS) progression remain largely unknown. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Aortic valve stenosis is a progressive disorder with variable progression rates. The factors affecting aortic stenosis (AS) progression remain largely unknown.
OBJECTIVES
This systematic review and meta-analysis sought to determine AS progression rates and to assess the impact of baseline AS severity and sex on disease progression.
METHODS
The authors searched Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception to July 1, 2020, for prospective studies evaluating the progression of AS with the use of echocardiography (mean gradient [MG], peak velocity [PV], peak gradient [PG], or aortic valve area [AVA]) or computed tomography (calcium score [AVC]). Random-effects meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the rate of AS progression for each parameter stratified by baseline severity, and meta-regression was performed to determine the impact of baseline severity and of sex on AS progression rate.
RESULTS
A total of 24 studies including 5,450 patients (40% female) met inclusion criteria. The pooled annualized progression of MG was +4.10 mm Hg (95% CI: 2.80-5.41 mm Hg), AVA -0.08 cm (95% CI: 0.06-0.10 cm), PV +0.19 m/s (95% CI: 0.13-0.24 m/s), PG +7.86 mm Hg (95% CI: 4.98-10.75 mm Hg), and AVC +158.5 AU (95% CI: 55.0-261.9 AU). Increasing baseline severity of AS was predictive of higher rates of progression for MG (P < 0.001), PV (P = 0.001), and AVC (P < 0.001), but not AVA (P = 0.34) or PG (P = 0.21). Only 4 studies reported AS progression stratified by sex, with only PV and AVC having 3 studies to perform a meta-analysis. No difference between sex was observed for PV (P = 0.397) or AVC (P = 0.572), but the level of confidence was low.
CONCLUSIONS
This study provides progression rates for both hemodynamic and anatomic parameters of AS and shows that increasing hemodynamic and anatomic baseline severity is associated with faster AS progression. More studies are needed to determine if sex differences affect AS progression. (Aortic Valve Stenosis Progression Rate: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis; CRD42021207726).
Topics: Humans; Female; Male; Aortic Valve; Prospective Studies; Predictive Value of Tests; Aortic Valve Stenosis; Hemodynamics; Severity of Illness Index
PubMed: 36648053
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcmg.2022.10.009 -
Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine Jun 2020Infective endocarditis (IE) represents one of the most challenging clinical entities, requiring a multidisciplinary approach. The increasing number of surgical and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Infective endocarditis (IE) represents one of the most challenging clinical entities, requiring a multidisciplinary approach. The increasing number of surgical and transcatheter heart valves replacements performed annually lead to a higher incidence of prosthetic valve endocarditis. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) brought a new alternative for the treatment of aortic stenosis and a new subgroup of IE with its features. We aimed to compare the incidence of IE in TAVI and surgical valve replacement (SAVR) to identify risk factors for TAVI-IE, evaluate the possible impact on mortality, and clarify the best treatment strategies. A digital scan in PubMed and SCOPUS databases was performed. 68 publications were selected to perform a meta-analysis and systematic review on epidemiology, risk factors, and mortality predictors in TAVI-IE. No significant difference in IE rate was noted between patients with TAVI and those with SAVR for in-hospital, early, mid-term and late IE. Male gender, intubation, new pacemaker implantation IE and CKD were correlated with TAVI-IE. Surgical treatment was performed in 22.3% of cases. Overall mortality for the pooled cohort was 38.3%. In a multivariate logistic regression model, surgical treatment and self-expandable device were linked to lower mortality in TAVI-IE. Even if the invasive procedure can trigger bacteremia, exposing the TAVI valve to future infection, no significant difference in IE rate was noted in our analysis between patients with TAVI and those with SAVR for in-hospital, early, mid-term and late IE. Surgical treatment of TAVI-IE can be a viable option in patients with a prohibitive risk score.
Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Endocarditis; Female; Heart Valve Prosthesis; Humans; Incidence; Male; Middle Aged; Prognosis; Prosthesis-Related Infections; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement
PubMed: 32706214
DOI: 10.31083/j.rcm.2020.02.68 -
Annals of Cardiothoracic Surgery Mar 2015Sutureless aortic valve replacement (SU-AVR) has emerged as an innovative alternative for treatment of aortic stenosis. By avoiding the placement of sutures, this... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Sutureless aortic valve replacement (SU-AVR) has emerged as an innovative alternative for treatment of aortic stenosis. By avoiding the placement of sutures, this approach aims to reduce cross-clamp and cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) duration and thereby improve surgical outcomes and facilitate a minimally invasive approach suitable for higher risk patients. The present systematic review and meta-analysis aims to assess the safety and efficacy of SU-AVR approach in the current literature.
METHODS
Electronic searches were performed using six databases from their inception to January 2014. Relevant studies utilizing sutureless valves for aortic valve implantation were identified. Data were extracted and analyzed according to predefined clinical endpoints.
RESULTS
Twelve studies were identified for inclusion of qualitative and quantitative analyses, all of which were observational reports. The minimally invasive approach was used in 40.4% of included patients, while 22.8% underwent concomitant coronary bypass surgery. Pooled cross-clamp and CPB duration for isolated AVR was 56.7 and 46.5 minutes, respectively. Pooled 30-day and 1-year mortality rates were 2.1% and 4.9%, respectively, while the incidences of strokes (1.5%), valve degenerations (0.4%) and paravalvular leaks (PVL) (3.0%) were acceptable.
CONCLUSIONS
The evaluation of current observational evidence suggests that sutureless aortic valve implantation is a safe procedure associated with shorter cross-clamp and CPB duration, and comparable complication rates to the conventional approach in the short-term.
PubMed: 25870805
DOI: 10.3978/j.issn.2225-319X.2014.06.01 -
Clinical and Translational Science Aug 2022Aortic stenosis (AS) is the commonest valve lesion requiring surgery in the Western world. The presence of myocardial fibrosis is associated with mortality even after... (Review)
Review
Aortic stenosis (AS) is the commonest valve lesion requiring surgery in the Western world. The presence of myocardial fibrosis is associated with mortality even after valve replacement. MicroRNAs could serve as biomarkers of fibrosis and risk stratify patients for earlier intervention. This study aimed to systematically review reports of micro-RNA (miR) associated with fibrosis in AS and identify potential biomarkers. We searched EMBASE, Medline, and Web of Science up to May 2020. Studies that reported on the role of miRs in AS and cardiac fibrosis were included. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Of 4230 reports screened, 25 were included. All studies were of low to moderate quality. MiRs were analyzed in myocardial tissue (n = 10), aortic valve tissue (n = 5), plasma (n = 5), and serum (n = 5). A total of 365 miRs were reported, of which only a few were reported in more than one paper (3 in the myocardium, 5 in the aortic valve, and 1 in plasma). miR-21 was upregulated in plasma and myocardial tissue. MiR-19b was downregulated in the myocardium. Papers reporting myocardial miR-1 contradicted each other, and miR-133a was associated with increased left ventricular mass regression post-surgery. In the aortic valve, miRs-665, 602 and 939 were downregulated, and miRs-193b and 214 were upregulated. The data on miR in fibrosis in AS is scarce and of low to moderate quality. Further studies are needed to identify novel miRs as biomarkers, especially at an earlier asymptomatic phase of the disease.
Topics: Aortic Valve Stenosis; Biomarkers; Fibrosis; Humans; MicroRNAs; Myocardium
PubMed: 35579611
DOI: 10.1111/cts.13303 -
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