User login
Sapien M3 mitral valve replacement data reported for first 10 patients
WASHINGTON – A novel transcatheter mitral valve replacement with a transseptally introduced docking mechanism that secures the valve with native mitral valve leaflets was found feasible and effective in an initial series of 10 patients, according to a first-in-man report at CRT 2018 sponsored by the Cardiovascular Research Institute at Washington Hospital Center.
“All patients remained hemodynamically stable throughout the procedure, and the valve was successfully implanted in all patients,” reported John G. Webb, MD, McLeod Professor of Heart Valve Intervention at the University of British Columbia, Vancouver.
The docking system “is retrievable up until the point of the final release,” Dr. Webb explained. A knitted polyethylene terephthalate skirt is employed to aid in creating a seal between the leaflets and the dock. Once the docking system is in place, the procedure “then becomes a relatively standard transcatheter transseptal valve-in-valve–type procedure” that is a “fairly easy part of the procedure at centers with transcatheter valve implantation experience.”
The very first case was performed in a 75-year-old woman with severe mitral valve insufficiency. Frail with multiple comorbidities and a left ventricular ejection fraction of 30%, the patient was not a candidate for surgery. Although Dr. Webb acknowledged that the first case “was a learning process,” he reported that the patient was discharged after a 1-night hospital stay with reassuring valve placement and function based on imaging studies.
Data was available from 10 patients from five participating centers in Canada and the United States. The mean age was 74 years, and all were New York Heart Association class III or higher. The mean left ventricular ejection fraction was 37.5%. Although the average Society of Thoracic Surgery risk score was only 4.9%, Dr. Webb noted that this underestimated the vulnerability of a population in which most had compromised renal function. Half of the 10 had severe mitral valve regurgitation prior to valve replacement, and the remainder had moderate to severe regurgitation.
“At the end of 30 days, all had mild or less insufficiency,” Dr. Webb reported. Although one patient did develop significant mitral insufficiency after discharge because of a small tear attributed to probing, it was repaired with a plug. The one technical failure occurred in a patient who required a plug during the course of valve replacement; again, the plug proved effective for preventing significant valve insufficiency.
In this series of patients, one stroke occurred 2 days after the procedure, but there were no deaths in the initial 30-day follow-up, according to Dr. Webb. Although he noted that the procedure time in the first case was 4 hours, the procedure times became shorter with experience and the second-to-last and last cases took 2.5 and 1.3 hours, respectively.
Howard C. Herrmann, MD, director of the interventional cardiology program at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, and a panelist on the symposium where these data were presented, called the results “exciting.” However, he also noted that “this is the first time that any us have had a look at this device,” so more data will be needed to understand its clinical potential.
Edwards Lifesciences sponsored this study. Dr. Webb reported financial relationships with Abbott Vascular, Edwards Lifesciences, Essential Medical, and Vivitro.
WASHINGTON – A novel transcatheter mitral valve replacement with a transseptally introduced docking mechanism that secures the valve with native mitral valve leaflets was found feasible and effective in an initial series of 10 patients, according to a first-in-man report at CRT 2018 sponsored by the Cardiovascular Research Institute at Washington Hospital Center.
“All patients remained hemodynamically stable throughout the procedure, and the valve was successfully implanted in all patients,” reported John G. Webb, MD, McLeod Professor of Heart Valve Intervention at the University of British Columbia, Vancouver.
The docking system “is retrievable up until the point of the final release,” Dr. Webb explained. A knitted polyethylene terephthalate skirt is employed to aid in creating a seal between the leaflets and the dock. Once the docking system is in place, the procedure “then becomes a relatively standard transcatheter transseptal valve-in-valve–type procedure” that is a “fairly easy part of the procedure at centers with transcatheter valve implantation experience.”
The very first case was performed in a 75-year-old woman with severe mitral valve insufficiency. Frail with multiple comorbidities and a left ventricular ejection fraction of 30%, the patient was not a candidate for surgery. Although Dr. Webb acknowledged that the first case “was a learning process,” he reported that the patient was discharged after a 1-night hospital stay with reassuring valve placement and function based on imaging studies.
Data was available from 10 patients from five participating centers in Canada and the United States. The mean age was 74 years, and all were New York Heart Association class III or higher. The mean left ventricular ejection fraction was 37.5%. Although the average Society of Thoracic Surgery risk score was only 4.9%, Dr. Webb noted that this underestimated the vulnerability of a population in which most had compromised renal function. Half of the 10 had severe mitral valve regurgitation prior to valve replacement, and the remainder had moderate to severe regurgitation.
“At the end of 30 days, all had mild or less insufficiency,” Dr. Webb reported. Although one patient did develop significant mitral insufficiency after discharge because of a small tear attributed to probing, it was repaired with a plug. The one technical failure occurred in a patient who required a plug during the course of valve replacement; again, the plug proved effective for preventing significant valve insufficiency.
In this series of patients, one stroke occurred 2 days after the procedure, but there were no deaths in the initial 30-day follow-up, according to Dr. Webb. Although he noted that the procedure time in the first case was 4 hours, the procedure times became shorter with experience and the second-to-last and last cases took 2.5 and 1.3 hours, respectively.
Howard C. Herrmann, MD, director of the interventional cardiology program at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, and a panelist on the symposium where these data were presented, called the results “exciting.” However, he also noted that “this is the first time that any us have had a look at this device,” so more data will be needed to understand its clinical potential.
Edwards Lifesciences sponsored this study. Dr. Webb reported financial relationships with Abbott Vascular, Edwards Lifesciences, Essential Medical, and Vivitro.
WASHINGTON – A novel transcatheter mitral valve replacement with a transseptally introduced docking mechanism that secures the valve with native mitral valve leaflets was found feasible and effective in an initial series of 10 patients, according to a first-in-man report at CRT 2018 sponsored by the Cardiovascular Research Institute at Washington Hospital Center.
“All patients remained hemodynamically stable throughout the procedure, and the valve was successfully implanted in all patients,” reported John G. Webb, MD, McLeod Professor of Heart Valve Intervention at the University of British Columbia, Vancouver.
The docking system “is retrievable up until the point of the final release,” Dr. Webb explained. A knitted polyethylene terephthalate skirt is employed to aid in creating a seal between the leaflets and the dock. Once the docking system is in place, the procedure “then becomes a relatively standard transcatheter transseptal valve-in-valve–type procedure” that is a “fairly easy part of the procedure at centers with transcatheter valve implantation experience.”
The very first case was performed in a 75-year-old woman with severe mitral valve insufficiency. Frail with multiple comorbidities and a left ventricular ejection fraction of 30%, the patient was not a candidate for surgery. Although Dr. Webb acknowledged that the first case “was a learning process,” he reported that the patient was discharged after a 1-night hospital stay with reassuring valve placement and function based on imaging studies.
Data was available from 10 patients from five participating centers in Canada and the United States. The mean age was 74 years, and all were New York Heart Association class III or higher. The mean left ventricular ejection fraction was 37.5%. Although the average Society of Thoracic Surgery risk score was only 4.9%, Dr. Webb noted that this underestimated the vulnerability of a population in which most had compromised renal function. Half of the 10 had severe mitral valve regurgitation prior to valve replacement, and the remainder had moderate to severe regurgitation.
“At the end of 30 days, all had mild or less insufficiency,” Dr. Webb reported. Although one patient did develop significant mitral insufficiency after discharge because of a small tear attributed to probing, it was repaired with a plug. The one technical failure occurred in a patient who required a plug during the course of valve replacement; again, the plug proved effective for preventing significant valve insufficiency.
In this series of patients, one stroke occurred 2 days after the procedure, but there were no deaths in the initial 30-day follow-up, according to Dr. Webb. Although he noted that the procedure time in the first case was 4 hours, the procedure times became shorter with experience and the second-to-last and last cases took 2.5 and 1.3 hours, respectively.
Howard C. Herrmann, MD, director of the interventional cardiology program at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, and a panelist on the symposium where these data were presented, called the results “exciting.” However, he also noted that “this is the first time that any us have had a look at this device,” so more data will be needed to understand its clinical potential.
Edwards Lifesciences sponsored this study. Dr. Webb reported financial relationships with Abbott Vascular, Edwards Lifesciences, Essential Medical, and Vivitro.
REPORTING FROM CRT 2018
Key clinical point: Initial experience with a transcatheter transseptal mitral valve replacement is encouraging.
Major finding: In the first 10 patients, technical success was achieved in 9.
Study details: A summary of first clinical experience at multiple centers.
Disclosures: Edwards Lifesciences sponsored this study. Dr. Webb reported financial relationships with Abbott Vascular, Edwards Lifesciences, Essential Medical, and Vivitro.
Malignant pleural mesothelioma guidelines often are ignored
SAN DIEGO – National guidelines for the treatment of malignant pleural mesothelioma often are not followed, a new study showed, with fewer than one-third of patients receiving cancer-directed surgery.
Another 32% received no treatment, although that didn’t seem to have an impact on median months of survival.
Still, “there can be a wide variation in median survival time, depending on clinical factors and tumor characteristics,” said study coauthor Harmik Soukiasian, MD, of Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles. “Given the variation in prognosis, it is quite astonishing that over 30% of MPM patients are not receiving any form of treatment. As clinicians armed with these data, we need to investigate why that is.”
Dr. Soukiasian presented the study findings at the annual meeting of the American Association for Thoracic Surgery.
MPM, a rare cancer, is mainly linked to asbestos exposure. “MPM is almost always a fatal disease, and the prognosis can only be modestly influenced by oncological treatments,” according to the authors of guidelines released in 2013. “The diagnostic process can be complex, with highly specialized advice frequently required to arrive at a definite diagnosis. Treatment varies from therapeutic nihilism to radical combined-modality treatment approaches” (J Thorac Dis. 2013 Dec;5[6]:E254-E307).
Surgical resection is a controversial treatment for MPM, Dr. Soukiasian said. It is “based on the principle of macroscopic resection of solid tumor with adjuvant therapy to treat micrometastatic disease,” he explained. “Cancer-directed surgery for MPM is usually reserved for localized epithelial type histology and is associated with a 5-year survival rate of 15%.”
For the new study, the investigators tracked 3,834 patients in the National Cancer Database (2004-2014) diagnosed with MPM clinical stages I-III. Most had epithelioid MPM (69%), with sarcomatoid (17%) and mixed subtype (15%) making up the rest. They examined whether patient treatment complied with the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines, which recommend surgery in resectable epithelioid MPM.
“Our study revealed significant lack of compliance with NCCN guidelines, as well as many disparities in the management of MPM,” Dr. Soukiasian said. “For the overall cohort, 32.3% of patients did not receive any treatment, 18.1% had surgery plus chemotherapy, 38.6% chemotherapy alone, and only 7% received trimodality therapy. In patients with epithelial histology, surgery was significantly underutilized, with only 30% of patients receiving cancer-directed surgery.”
In addition, he said, “our study reveals several disparities that affect compliance with NCCN guidelines. Treatment disparities were observed in women, octogenarians, the uninsured, the Medicaid-insured, and in patients with comorbidities. Guideline adherence was significantly increased in academic and high-volume hospitals with an associated increase in survival.”
But the study also found that median survival estimates were similar regardless of treatment: 10 months for no treatment, 15 months for chemotherapy only, 17 months for surgery only, and 22 months for surgery plus chemotherapy.
During the AATS presentation, an audience member asked about how performance status – a measure of a person’s ability to perform everyday activities – affects the eligibility for surgery.
“It’s quite common for low performance status to exclude someone from surgery,” the audience member said. “Some of these patients are very sick.”
Dr. Soukiasian acknowledged that performance status was not included in the data. The study was focused on the gap between guidelines and real-world practice, and generated questions of why and about the potential opportunity for improved treatment of these patients.
How do patient choices, cost, and quality of life factor in? “These are very important questions and concerns,” Dr. Soukiasian said. “Although our research does not provide data or conclusions on quality of life or cost, these topics will be important to address in follow-up studies to elucidate possible barriers in the treatment of MPM and the initiation of future educational opportunities for our patients.”
No disclosures and no study funding were reported.
SOURCE: Espinoza-Mercado F et al. General Thoracic Surgery Simultaneous Scientific Session. Abstract 18.
SAN DIEGO – National guidelines for the treatment of malignant pleural mesothelioma often are not followed, a new study showed, with fewer than one-third of patients receiving cancer-directed surgery.
Another 32% received no treatment, although that didn’t seem to have an impact on median months of survival.
Still, “there can be a wide variation in median survival time, depending on clinical factors and tumor characteristics,” said study coauthor Harmik Soukiasian, MD, of Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles. “Given the variation in prognosis, it is quite astonishing that over 30% of MPM patients are not receiving any form of treatment. As clinicians armed with these data, we need to investigate why that is.”
Dr. Soukiasian presented the study findings at the annual meeting of the American Association for Thoracic Surgery.
MPM, a rare cancer, is mainly linked to asbestos exposure. “MPM is almost always a fatal disease, and the prognosis can only be modestly influenced by oncological treatments,” according to the authors of guidelines released in 2013. “The diagnostic process can be complex, with highly specialized advice frequently required to arrive at a definite diagnosis. Treatment varies from therapeutic nihilism to radical combined-modality treatment approaches” (J Thorac Dis. 2013 Dec;5[6]:E254-E307).
Surgical resection is a controversial treatment for MPM, Dr. Soukiasian said. It is “based on the principle of macroscopic resection of solid tumor with adjuvant therapy to treat micrometastatic disease,” he explained. “Cancer-directed surgery for MPM is usually reserved for localized epithelial type histology and is associated with a 5-year survival rate of 15%.”
For the new study, the investigators tracked 3,834 patients in the National Cancer Database (2004-2014) diagnosed with MPM clinical stages I-III. Most had epithelioid MPM (69%), with sarcomatoid (17%) and mixed subtype (15%) making up the rest. They examined whether patient treatment complied with the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines, which recommend surgery in resectable epithelioid MPM.
“Our study revealed significant lack of compliance with NCCN guidelines, as well as many disparities in the management of MPM,” Dr. Soukiasian said. “For the overall cohort, 32.3% of patients did not receive any treatment, 18.1% had surgery plus chemotherapy, 38.6% chemotherapy alone, and only 7% received trimodality therapy. In patients with epithelial histology, surgery was significantly underutilized, with only 30% of patients receiving cancer-directed surgery.”
In addition, he said, “our study reveals several disparities that affect compliance with NCCN guidelines. Treatment disparities were observed in women, octogenarians, the uninsured, the Medicaid-insured, and in patients with comorbidities. Guideline adherence was significantly increased in academic and high-volume hospitals with an associated increase in survival.”
But the study also found that median survival estimates were similar regardless of treatment: 10 months for no treatment, 15 months for chemotherapy only, 17 months for surgery only, and 22 months for surgery plus chemotherapy.
During the AATS presentation, an audience member asked about how performance status – a measure of a person’s ability to perform everyday activities – affects the eligibility for surgery.
“It’s quite common for low performance status to exclude someone from surgery,” the audience member said. “Some of these patients are very sick.”
Dr. Soukiasian acknowledged that performance status was not included in the data. The study was focused on the gap between guidelines and real-world practice, and generated questions of why and about the potential opportunity for improved treatment of these patients.
How do patient choices, cost, and quality of life factor in? “These are very important questions and concerns,” Dr. Soukiasian said. “Although our research does not provide data or conclusions on quality of life or cost, these topics will be important to address in follow-up studies to elucidate possible barriers in the treatment of MPM and the initiation of future educational opportunities for our patients.”
No disclosures and no study funding were reported.
SOURCE: Espinoza-Mercado F et al. General Thoracic Surgery Simultaneous Scientific Session. Abstract 18.
SAN DIEGO – National guidelines for the treatment of malignant pleural mesothelioma often are not followed, a new study showed, with fewer than one-third of patients receiving cancer-directed surgery.
Another 32% received no treatment, although that didn’t seem to have an impact on median months of survival.
Still, “there can be a wide variation in median survival time, depending on clinical factors and tumor characteristics,” said study coauthor Harmik Soukiasian, MD, of Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles. “Given the variation in prognosis, it is quite astonishing that over 30% of MPM patients are not receiving any form of treatment. As clinicians armed with these data, we need to investigate why that is.”
Dr. Soukiasian presented the study findings at the annual meeting of the American Association for Thoracic Surgery.
MPM, a rare cancer, is mainly linked to asbestos exposure. “MPM is almost always a fatal disease, and the prognosis can only be modestly influenced by oncological treatments,” according to the authors of guidelines released in 2013. “The diagnostic process can be complex, with highly specialized advice frequently required to arrive at a definite diagnosis. Treatment varies from therapeutic nihilism to radical combined-modality treatment approaches” (J Thorac Dis. 2013 Dec;5[6]:E254-E307).
Surgical resection is a controversial treatment for MPM, Dr. Soukiasian said. It is “based on the principle of macroscopic resection of solid tumor with adjuvant therapy to treat micrometastatic disease,” he explained. “Cancer-directed surgery for MPM is usually reserved for localized epithelial type histology and is associated with a 5-year survival rate of 15%.”
For the new study, the investigators tracked 3,834 patients in the National Cancer Database (2004-2014) diagnosed with MPM clinical stages I-III. Most had epithelioid MPM (69%), with sarcomatoid (17%) and mixed subtype (15%) making up the rest. They examined whether patient treatment complied with the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines, which recommend surgery in resectable epithelioid MPM.
“Our study revealed significant lack of compliance with NCCN guidelines, as well as many disparities in the management of MPM,” Dr. Soukiasian said. “For the overall cohort, 32.3% of patients did not receive any treatment, 18.1% had surgery plus chemotherapy, 38.6% chemotherapy alone, and only 7% received trimodality therapy. In patients with epithelial histology, surgery was significantly underutilized, with only 30% of patients receiving cancer-directed surgery.”
In addition, he said, “our study reveals several disparities that affect compliance with NCCN guidelines. Treatment disparities were observed in women, octogenarians, the uninsured, the Medicaid-insured, and in patients with comorbidities. Guideline adherence was significantly increased in academic and high-volume hospitals with an associated increase in survival.”
But the study also found that median survival estimates were similar regardless of treatment: 10 months for no treatment, 15 months for chemotherapy only, 17 months for surgery only, and 22 months for surgery plus chemotherapy.
During the AATS presentation, an audience member asked about how performance status – a measure of a person’s ability to perform everyday activities – affects the eligibility for surgery.
“It’s quite common for low performance status to exclude someone from surgery,” the audience member said. “Some of these patients are very sick.”
Dr. Soukiasian acknowledged that performance status was not included in the data. The study was focused on the gap between guidelines and real-world practice, and generated questions of why and about the potential opportunity for improved treatment of these patients.
How do patient choices, cost, and quality of life factor in? “These are very important questions and concerns,” Dr. Soukiasian said. “Although our research does not provide data or conclusions on quality of life or cost, these topics will be important to address in follow-up studies to elucidate possible barriers in the treatment of MPM and the initiation of future educational opportunities for our patients.”
No disclosures and no study funding were reported.
SOURCE: Espinoza-Mercado F et al. General Thoracic Surgery Simultaneous Scientific Session. Abstract 18.
REPORTING FROM THE AATS ANNUAL MEETING
Key clinical point:
Major finding: Guidelines recommend surgery in epithelioid MPM, but only 30% of patients received it.
Study details: Analysis of 3,834 patients diagnosed with MPM clinical stages I-III during 2004-2014.
Disclosures: No disclosures and no study funding were reported.
Source: Espinoza-Mercado F et al. General Thoracic Surgery Simultaneous Scientific Session. Abstract 18.
Preoperative exercise lowers postoperative lung resection complications
with a systematic review suggesting it reduces postoperative complications and duration of hospital stay.
The review and meta-analysis, published in the February British Journal of Sports Medicine, looked at the impact of preoperative exercise in patients undergoing surgery for a range of cancers.
Their review of 13 interventional trials, involving 806 patients and six tumor types, found the postoperative benefits of exercise were evident only in patients undergoing lung resection.
Data from five randomized controlled trials and one quasirandomized trial in lung cancer patients showed a significant 48% reduction in postoperative complications, and a significant mean reduction of 2.86 days in hospital stay among patients undergoing lung resection, compared with controls.
“Postoperative complication is a major concern for patients undergoing oncological surgery,” wrote Dr. Daniel Steffens, from the Surgical Outcomes Research Centre at the Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, and his coauthors. They suggested the benefits for patients undergoing lung resection were significant enough that exercise before surgery should be considered as standard preoperative care.
“Such findings may also [have impacts] on health care costs and on patients’ quality of life, and consequently, have important implications for patients, health care professionals and policy makers.”
The exercise regimens in the lung cancer studies mostly involved aerobic exercise, such as walking, and breathing exercises to train respiratory muscles, as well as use of an exercise bicycle. The exercises were undertaken in the 1-2 weeks before surgery, with a frequency ranging from three times a week to three times a day.
The authors noted that trials involving a higher frequency of exercise showed a larger effect size, which suggested there was a dose-response relationship.
There was little evidence of benefit in other tumor types. Two studies examined the benefits of preoperative pelvic floor muscle exercises in men undergoing radical prostatectomy and found significant benefits in quality of life, assessed using the International Continence Society Male Short form. However, the authors pointed out that the quality of evidence was very low.
One study investigated the effects of preoperative mouth-opening exercise training in patients undergoing surgery for oral cancer and found enhanced postoperative quality of life in these patients, but the researchers did not report estimates.
For patients undergoing surgery for colon cancer, colorectal liver metastases, and esophageal cancer, there was no benefit of exercise either in postoperative complications or duration of hospital stay. In all these studies, the authors rated the quality of evidence as “very low.”
“Despite the evidence suggesting that exercise improves physical and mental health in patients with cancer, there are only a limited number of trials investigating the effect of preoperative exercise on patients’ quality of life,” the authors wrote. “Therefore, the effect of preoperative exercise on quality of life at short-term and long-term postoperation should be explored in future trials.”
No conflicts of interest were declared.
chestphysician@frontlinemedcom.com
SOURCE: Steffens D et al. Br J Sports Med. 2018 Feb 1. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2017-098032
with a systematic review suggesting it reduces postoperative complications and duration of hospital stay.
The review and meta-analysis, published in the February British Journal of Sports Medicine, looked at the impact of preoperative exercise in patients undergoing surgery for a range of cancers.
Their review of 13 interventional trials, involving 806 patients and six tumor types, found the postoperative benefits of exercise were evident only in patients undergoing lung resection.
Data from five randomized controlled trials and one quasirandomized trial in lung cancer patients showed a significant 48% reduction in postoperative complications, and a significant mean reduction of 2.86 days in hospital stay among patients undergoing lung resection, compared with controls.
“Postoperative complication is a major concern for patients undergoing oncological surgery,” wrote Dr. Daniel Steffens, from the Surgical Outcomes Research Centre at the Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, and his coauthors. They suggested the benefits for patients undergoing lung resection were significant enough that exercise before surgery should be considered as standard preoperative care.
“Such findings may also [have impacts] on health care costs and on patients’ quality of life, and consequently, have important implications for patients, health care professionals and policy makers.”
The exercise regimens in the lung cancer studies mostly involved aerobic exercise, such as walking, and breathing exercises to train respiratory muscles, as well as use of an exercise bicycle. The exercises were undertaken in the 1-2 weeks before surgery, with a frequency ranging from three times a week to three times a day.
The authors noted that trials involving a higher frequency of exercise showed a larger effect size, which suggested there was a dose-response relationship.
There was little evidence of benefit in other tumor types. Two studies examined the benefits of preoperative pelvic floor muscle exercises in men undergoing radical prostatectomy and found significant benefits in quality of life, assessed using the International Continence Society Male Short form. However, the authors pointed out that the quality of evidence was very low.
One study investigated the effects of preoperative mouth-opening exercise training in patients undergoing surgery for oral cancer and found enhanced postoperative quality of life in these patients, but the researchers did not report estimates.
For patients undergoing surgery for colon cancer, colorectal liver metastases, and esophageal cancer, there was no benefit of exercise either in postoperative complications or duration of hospital stay. In all these studies, the authors rated the quality of evidence as “very low.”
“Despite the evidence suggesting that exercise improves physical and mental health in patients with cancer, there are only a limited number of trials investigating the effect of preoperative exercise on patients’ quality of life,” the authors wrote. “Therefore, the effect of preoperative exercise on quality of life at short-term and long-term postoperation should be explored in future trials.”
No conflicts of interest were declared.
chestphysician@frontlinemedcom.com
SOURCE: Steffens D et al. Br J Sports Med. 2018 Feb 1. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2017-098032
with a systematic review suggesting it reduces postoperative complications and duration of hospital stay.
The review and meta-analysis, published in the February British Journal of Sports Medicine, looked at the impact of preoperative exercise in patients undergoing surgery for a range of cancers.
Their review of 13 interventional trials, involving 806 patients and six tumor types, found the postoperative benefits of exercise were evident only in patients undergoing lung resection.
Data from five randomized controlled trials and one quasirandomized trial in lung cancer patients showed a significant 48% reduction in postoperative complications, and a significant mean reduction of 2.86 days in hospital stay among patients undergoing lung resection, compared with controls.
“Postoperative complication is a major concern for patients undergoing oncological surgery,” wrote Dr. Daniel Steffens, from the Surgical Outcomes Research Centre at the Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, and his coauthors. They suggested the benefits for patients undergoing lung resection were significant enough that exercise before surgery should be considered as standard preoperative care.
“Such findings may also [have impacts] on health care costs and on patients’ quality of life, and consequently, have important implications for patients, health care professionals and policy makers.”
The exercise regimens in the lung cancer studies mostly involved aerobic exercise, such as walking, and breathing exercises to train respiratory muscles, as well as use of an exercise bicycle. The exercises were undertaken in the 1-2 weeks before surgery, with a frequency ranging from three times a week to three times a day.
The authors noted that trials involving a higher frequency of exercise showed a larger effect size, which suggested there was a dose-response relationship.
There was little evidence of benefit in other tumor types. Two studies examined the benefits of preoperative pelvic floor muscle exercises in men undergoing radical prostatectomy and found significant benefits in quality of life, assessed using the International Continence Society Male Short form. However, the authors pointed out that the quality of evidence was very low.
One study investigated the effects of preoperative mouth-opening exercise training in patients undergoing surgery for oral cancer and found enhanced postoperative quality of life in these patients, but the researchers did not report estimates.
For patients undergoing surgery for colon cancer, colorectal liver metastases, and esophageal cancer, there was no benefit of exercise either in postoperative complications or duration of hospital stay. In all these studies, the authors rated the quality of evidence as “very low.”
“Despite the evidence suggesting that exercise improves physical and mental health in patients with cancer, there are only a limited number of trials investigating the effect of preoperative exercise on patients’ quality of life,” the authors wrote. “Therefore, the effect of preoperative exercise on quality of life at short-term and long-term postoperation should be explored in future trials.”
No conflicts of interest were declared.
chestphysician@frontlinemedcom.com
SOURCE: Steffens D et al. Br J Sports Med. 2018 Feb 1. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2017-098032
FROM THE BRITISH JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE
Key clinical point: Exercising before oncologic surgery appears to lower the risk of postoperative complications and reduce hospital stay for lung cancer patients.
Major finding: Patients who participated in preoperative exercise before lung cancer surgery had a 48% reduction in postoperative complications, compared with controls.
Data source: Systematic review and meta-analysis of 13 interventional trials involving 806 patients.
Disclosures: No conflicts of interest were declared.
Source: Steffens D et al. Br J Sports Med. 2018, Feb 1. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2017-098032
Surgical LAA occlusion tops anticoagulation for AF thromboprotection
Surgical left atrial appendage occlusion may be just as good as anticoagulation at preventing thromboembolic events in older people with atrial fibrillation, with less risk of bleeding into the brain, according to a database review of more than 10,000 patients.
Among elderly atrial fibrillation patients who underwent heart surgery with no oral follow-up oral anticoagulation, those who had the left atrial appendage surgically occluded were 74% less likely than were those who did not to be readmitted for a major thromboembolic event within 3 years, and 68% less likely to be readmitted for a hemorrhagic stroke, researchers at Duke University in Durham, N.C., found.
“The current study demonstrated that S-LAAO [surgical left atrial appendage occlusion] was associated with a significantly lower rate of thromboembolism among patients without oral anticoagulation. In the cohort of patients discharged with oral anticoagulation, S-LAAO was not associated with [reduced] thromboembolism but was associated with a lower risk for hemorrhagic stroke presumably related to eventual discontinuation of oral anticoagulation among S-LAAO patients,” reported Daniel Friedman, MD, and his coinvestigators. The study was published Jan. 23 in JAMA.
In short, the findings suggest that shutting down the left atrial appendage in older patients offers the same stroke protection as anticoagulation, but without the bleeding risk. Given the low rates of anticoagulant use, physicians have been considering that approach for a while. Even so, it’s only been a weak (IIb) recommendation so far in AF guidelines because of the lack of evidence.
That might change soon, but “additional randomized studies comparing S-LAAO without anticoagulation [versus] systemic anticoagulation alone will be needed to define the optimal use of S-LAAO,” said Dr. Friedman, a cardiothoracic surgeon at Duke, and his colleagues. Those studies are in the works.
The team found 10,524 older patients in the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Surgery Database during 2011-2012, and linked them to Medicare data so they could be followed for up to 3 years. About a third of the subjects had stand-alone coronary artery bypass grafting; the rest had mitral or aortic valve repairs with or without CABG.
The investigators compared outcomes among the 37% (3,892) who had S-LAAO with outcomes among those who did not. Participants were a median of 76 years of age, 61% were men, and they were all at high risk for AF stroke.
After a mean follow-up of 2.6 years, subjects who received S-LAAO without postoperative anticoagulation had a significantly lower risk of readmission for thromboembolism – stroke, transient ischemic attack, or systemic embolism – compared with those who received neither S-LAAO nor anticoagulation (unadjusted rate 4.2% versus 6.0%; adjusted subdistribution hazard ratio [sHR] 0.26, 95% CI, 0.17-0.40, P less than .001).
There was no extra embolic stroke protection from S-LAAO in patients who were discharged on anticoagulation (sHR 0.88, 95% CI, 0.56-1.39; P = .59), but the risk of returning with a hemorrhagic stroke was considerably less (sHR 0.32, 95% CI, 0.17-0.57, P less than .001).
The S-LAAO group more commonly had nonparoxysmal AF, a higher ejection fraction, a lower mortality risk score, and lower rates of common stroke risks, such as diabetes, hypertension, and prior stroke. The Duke team adjusted for those and a long list of other confounders, including smoking, age, preoperative warfarin, and academic hospital status.
There were important limitations. No one knows what surgeons did to close the LAA, or how well it worked, and most patients discharged on anticoagulation were sent home on warfarin, not the newer direct oral anticoagulants.
The investigators noted that “the strongest data to date for LAAO come from randomized trials comparing warfarin with percutaneous LAAO using the WATCHMAN device” from Boston Scientific.
The reduction in cardiovascular mortality in those trials appeared to be driven by a reduction in hemorrhagic stroke and occurred despite increased rates of ischemic stroke, they said.
The current study, however, showed that S-LAAO was associated with a significantly lower rate of thromboembolism in patients without oral anticoagulation, the authors said.
The work was funded, in part, by the Food and Drug Administration. Dr. Friedman reported grants from Boston Scientific and Abbott. Other authors reported financial relations with those and several other companies.
SOURCE: Friedman DJ, et. al. JAMA. 2018;319(4):365-74. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.20125.
The implications of the study may have far-reaching consequences on the best treatment to reduce both thromboembolism and hemorrhage associated with AF treatment.
There is a strong signal that S-LAAO may be equivalent to anticoagulation prophylaxis to avoid thromboembolism in certain patients. This possibility is intriguing because it suggests that S-LAAO may be as effective as anticoagulation and could potentially avoid the bleeding risks associated with anticoagulation. A reasonable hypothesis based on the authors’ findings is that ablation procedures that occlude the left atrial appendage are adequate treatments to avoid thromboembolism and to minimize postoperative anticoagulation-related hemorrhage. This somewhat novel hypothesis, if true, could avoid a significant morbidity associated with anticoagulation while providing adequate treatment for thromboembolic complications of AF.
Importantly, the results suggest that failure to perform an S-LAAO at the time of cardiac operation in patients with nonvalvular AF is associated with significantly increased intermediate-term thromboembolic risk.
Victor M. Ferraris , MD, PhD, a cardiothoracic surgeon at the University of Kentucky, Lexington, made his comments in an accompanying editorial. He had no conflicts of interest.
The implications of the study may have far-reaching consequences on the best treatment to reduce both thromboembolism and hemorrhage associated with AF treatment.
There is a strong signal that S-LAAO may be equivalent to anticoagulation prophylaxis to avoid thromboembolism in certain patients. This possibility is intriguing because it suggests that S-LAAO may be as effective as anticoagulation and could potentially avoid the bleeding risks associated with anticoagulation. A reasonable hypothesis based on the authors’ findings is that ablation procedures that occlude the left atrial appendage are adequate treatments to avoid thromboembolism and to minimize postoperative anticoagulation-related hemorrhage. This somewhat novel hypothesis, if true, could avoid a significant morbidity associated with anticoagulation while providing adequate treatment for thromboembolic complications of AF.
Importantly, the results suggest that failure to perform an S-LAAO at the time of cardiac operation in patients with nonvalvular AF is associated with significantly increased intermediate-term thromboembolic risk.
Victor M. Ferraris , MD, PhD, a cardiothoracic surgeon at the University of Kentucky, Lexington, made his comments in an accompanying editorial. He had no conflicts of interest.
The implications of the study may have far-reaching consequences on the best treatment to reduce both thromboembolism and hemorrhage associated with AF treatment.
There is a strong signal that S-LAAO may be equivalent to anticoagulation prophylaxis to avoid thromboembolism in certain patients. This possibility is intriguing because it suggests that S-LAAO may be as effective as anticoagulation and could potentially avoid the bleeding risks associated with anticoagulation. A reasonable hypothesis based on the authors’ findings is that ablation procedures that occlude the left atrial appendage are adequate treatments to avoid thromboembolism and to minimize postoperative anticoagulation-related hemorrhage. This somewhat novel hypothesis, if true, could avoid a significant morbidity associated with anticoagulation while providing adequate treatment for thromboembolic complications of AF.
Importantly, the results suggest that failure to perform an S-LAAO at the time of cardiac operation in patients with nonvalvular AF is associated with significantly increased intermediate-term thromboembolic risk.
Victor M. Ferraris , MD, PhD, a cardiothoracic surgeon at the University of Kentucky, Lexington, made his comments in an accompanying editorial. He had no conflicts of interest.
Surgical left atrial appendage occlusion may be just as good as anticoagulation at preventing thromboembolic events in older people with atrial fibrillation, with less risk of bleeding into the brain, according to a database review of more than 10,000 patients.
Among elderly atrial fibrillation patients who underwent heart surgery with no oral follow-up oral anticoagulation, those who had the left atrial appendage surgically occluded were 74% less likely than were those who did not to be readmitted for a major thromboembolic event within 3 years, and 68% less likely to be readmitted for a hemorrhagic stroke, researchers at Duke University in Durham, N.C., found.
“The current study demonstrated that S-LAAO [surgical left atrial appendage occlusion] was associated with a significantly lower rate of thromboembolism among patients without oral anticoagulation. In the cohort of patients discharged with oral anticoagulation, S-LAAO was not associated with [reduced] thromboembolism but was associated with a lower risk for hemorrhagic stroke presumably related to eventual discontinuation of oral anticoagulation among S-LAAO patients,” reported Daniel Friedman, MD, and his coinvestigators. The study was published Jan. 23 in JAMA.
In short, the findings suggest that shutting down the left atrial appendage in older patients offers the same stroke protection as anticoagulation, but without the bleeding risk. Given the low rates of anticoagulant use, physicians have been considering that approach for a while. Even so, it’s only been a weak (IIb) recommendation so far in AF guidelines because of the lack of evidence.
That might change soon, but “additional randomized studies comparing S-LAAO without anticoagulation [versus] systemic anticoagulation alone will be needed to define the optimal use of S-LAAO,” said Dr. Friedman, a cardiothoracic surgeon at Duke, and his colleagues. Those studies are in the works.
The team found 10,524 older patients in the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Surgery Database during 2011-2012, and linked them to Medicare data so they could be followed for up to 3 years. About a third of the subjects had stand-alone coronary artery bypass grafting; the rest had mitral or aortic valve repairs with or without CABG.
The investigators compared outcomes among the 37% (3,892) who had S-LAAO with outcomes among those who did not. Participants were a median of 76 years of age, 61% were men, and they were all at high risk for AF stroke.
After a mean follow-up of 2.6 years, subjects who received S-LAAO without postoperative anticoagulation had a significantly lower risk of readmission for thromboembolism – stroke, transient ischemic attack, or systemic embolism – compared with those who received neither S-LAAO nor anticoagulation (unadjusted rate 4.2% versus 6.0%; adjusted subdistribution hazard ratio [sHR] 0.26, 95% CI, 0.17-0.40, P less than .001).
There was no extra embolic stroke protection from S-LAAO in patients who were discharged on anticoagulation (sHR 0.88, 95% CI, 0.56-1.39; P = .59), but the risk of returning with a hemorrhagic stroke was considerably less (sHR 0.32, 95% CI, 0.17-0.57, P less than .001).
The S-LAAO group more commonly had nonparoxysmal AF, a higher ejection fraction, a lower mortality risk score, and lower rates of common stroke risks, such as diabetes, hypertension, and prior stroke. The Duke team adjusted for those and a long list of other confounders, including smoking, age, preoperative warfarin, and academic hospital status.
There were important limitations. No one knows what surgeons did to close the LAA, or how well it worked, and most patients discharged on anticoagulation were sent home on warfarin, not the newer direct oral anticoagulants.
The investigators noted that “the strongest data to date for LAAO come from randomized trials comparing warfarin with percutaneous LAAO using the WATCHMAN device” from Boston Scientific.
The reduction in cardiovascular mortality in those trials appeared to be driven by a reduction in hemorrhagic stroke and occurred despite increased rates of ischemic stroke, they said.
The current study, however, showed that S-LAAO was associated with a significantly lower rate of thromboembolism in patients without oral anticoagulation, the authors said.
The work was funded, in part, by the Food and Drug Administration. Dr. Friedman reported grants from Boston Scientific and Abbott. Other authors reported financial relations with those and several other companies.
SOURCE: Friedman DJ, et. al. JAMA. 2018;319(4):365-74. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.20125.
Surgical left atrial appendage occlusion may be just as good as anticoagulation at preventing thromboembolic events in older people with atrial fibrillation, with less risk of bleeding into the brain, according to a database review of more than 10,000 patients.
Among elderly atrial fibrillation patients who underwent heart surgery with no oral follow-up oral anticoagulation, those who had the left atrial appendage surgically occluded were 74% less likely than were those who did not to be readmitted for a major thromboembolic event within 3 years, and 68% less likely to be readmitted for a hemorrhagic stroke, researchers at Duke University in Durham, N.C., found.
“The current study demonstrated that S-LAAO [surgical left atrial appendage occlusion] was associated with a significantly lower rate of thromboembolism among patients without oral anticoagulation. In the cohort of patients discharged with oral anticoagulation, S-LAAO was not associated with [reduced] thromboembolism but was associated with a lower risk for hemorrhagic stroke presumably related to eventual discontinuation of oral anticoagulation among S-LAAO patients,” reported Daniel Friedman, MD, and his coinvestigators. The study was published Jan. 23 in JAMA.
In short, the findings suggest that shutting down the left atrial appendage in older patients offers the same stroke protection as anticoagulation, but without the bleeding risk. Given the low rates of anticoagulant use, physicians have been considering that approach for a while. Even so, it’s only been a weak (IIb) recommendation so far in AF guidelines because of the lack of evidence.
That might change soon, but “additional randomized studies comparing S-LAAO without anticoagulation [versus] systemic anticoagulation alone will be needed to define the optimal use of S-LAAO,” said Dr. Friedman, a cardiothoracic surgeon at Duke, and his colleagues. Those studies are in the works.
The team found 10,524 older patients in the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Surgery Database during 2011-2012, and linked them to Medicare data so they could be followed for up to 3 years. About a third of the subjects had stand-alone coronary artery bypass grafting; the rest had mitral or aortic valve repairs with or without CABG.
The investigators compared outcomes among the 37% (3,892) who had S-LAAO with outcomes among those who did not. Participants were a median of 76 years of age, 61% were men, and they were all at high risk for AF stroke.
After a mean follow-up of 2.6 years, subjects who received S-LAAO without postoperative anticoagulation had a significantly lower risk of readmission for thromboembolism – stroke, transient ischemic attack, or systemic embolism – compared with those who received neither S-LAAO nor anticoagulation (unadjusted rate 4.2% versus 6.0%; adjusted subdistribution hazard ratio [sHR] 0.26, 95% CI, 0.17-0.40, P less than .001).
There was no extra embolic stroke protection from S-LAAO in patients who were discharged on anticoagulation (sHR 0.88, 95% CI, 0.56-1.39; P = .59), but the risk of returning with a hemorrhagic stroke was considerably less (sHR 0.32, 95% CI, 0.17-0.57, P less than .001).
The S-LAAO group more commonly had nonparoxysmal AF, a higher ejection fraction, a lower mortality risk score, and lower rates of common stroke risks, such as diabetes, hypertension, and prior stroke. The Duke team adjusted for those and a long list of other confounders, including smoking, age, preoperative warfarin, and academic hospital status.
There were important limitations. No one knows what surgeons did to close the LAA, or how well it worked, and most patients discharged on anticoagulation were sent home on warfarin, not the newer direct oral anticoagulants.
The investigators noted that “the strongest data to date for LAAO come from randomized trials comparing warfarin with percutaneous LAAO using the WATCHMAN device” from Boston Scientific.
The reduction in cardiovascular mortality in those trials appeared to be driven by a reduction in hemorrhagic stroke and occurred despite increased rates of ischemic stroke, they said.
The current study, however, showed that S-LAAO was associated with a significantly lower rate of thromboembolism in patients without oral anticoagulation, the authors said.
The work was funded, in part, by the Food and Drug Administration. Dr. Friedman reported grants from Boston Scientific and Abbott. Other authors reported financial relations with those and several other companies.
SOURCE: Friedman DJ, et. al. JAMA. 2018;319(4):365-74. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.20125.
FROM JAMA
Key clinical point: Surgical left atrial appendage occlusion (S-LAAO) is probably just as good as anticoagulation at preventing thromboembolic events in older people with atrial fibrillation, with less risk of bleeding into the brain.
Major finding: within 3 years, and 68% less likely to be readmitted for a hemorrhagic stroke.
Study details: Database review of more than 10,000 elderly AF patients followed for up to 3 years after cardiac surgery.
Disclosures: The work was funded, in part, by the Food and Drug Administration. The authors had financial ties to Boston Scientific, Abbott, and several other companies.
Source: Friedman DJ, et. al. JAMA. 2018;319(4):365-74. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.20125
Transcatheter aortic valve-in-ring for mitral disease a winner
DENVER – Transseptal mitral valve implantation of an off-the-shelf, commercially available TAVR valve in high-surgical-risk patients with a failing surgically implanted mitral ring prosthesis has become a reasonable treatment strategy in light of the interim findings of the ground-breaking MITRAL trial, Mayra E. Guerrero, MD, said at the Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics annual educational meeting.
Her presentation of the preliminary results of the MITRAL (Mitral Implantation of Transcatheter Valves) trial showed this valve-in-ring (ViR) treatment strategy using the Sapien 3 valve was associated with low 30-day morbidity and mortality rates and impressive symptomatic improvement.
In contrast, another arm of the MITRAL trial showed that placement of the Sapien 3 TAVR valve in high-surgical-risk patients with severe mitral stenosis due to mitral annular calcification (MAC) of their native valve is a treatment strategy that’s not yet ready for prime time, she added at the meeting, which was sponsored by the Cardiovascular Research Foundation.
“Transcatheter mitral valve replacement in MAC is a challenging procedure associated with complications,” Dr. Guerrero observed. “It may become a reasonable alternative for high-surgical-risk patients with favorable anatomy, but techniques require further refinement.”
The ViR arm of the observational multicenter prospective MITRAL trial included 30 patients with extremely high surgical risk and either severe mitral stenosis as defined by a mitral valve area of 1.5 cm2 or less or moderate mitral stenosis plus severe mitral regurgitation. The most common type of failing ring was the Edwards Physio, in nine patients. Access for transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR) was transseptal in 100% of patients.
The technical success rate at exit from the catheterization lab was 70%. The procedural success rate at 30 days was 62%.
Six patients required a second valve. This was mainly because of malpositioning of the first valve with resultant mitral regurgitation; however, this problem became a nonissue as operator experience grew. All six affected patients were alive at 30 days, and four of the six were New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class I or II.
In-hospital and 30-day mortality rates were low. There was a single cardiovascular death and one noncardiac death in hospital, with no additional deaths through 30 days. No cases of stroke, acute MI, or valve embolization or thrombosis occurred. The mean mitral valve area at 30 days was 2.1 cm2, although three patients still had a mitral valve area of less 1.5 cm2. Three patients experienced acute renal failure requiring hemodialysis. Seventy-five percent of patients had no or trace mitral regurgitation by echocardiography; the rest had mild regurgitation.
Although at baseline more than 60% of the patients were New York Heart Association class III, 10% were class IV, and the rest were class II, at 30 days more than 30% were New York Heart Association class I, 40% were class II, and the rest were class III.
The 30-day all-cause mortality rate of 6.8% in the MITRAL study is roughly half that reported for ViR patients in the Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Valve Therapy Registry. Dr. Guerrero attributed this to refined procedural techniques and improved patient selection through the use of CT imaging and echocardiography.
Heart valve design changes, such as a longer inner skirt, might further improve the technical success rate for ViR, according to Dr. Guerrero, an interventional cardiologist at NorthShore University Health System in Evanston, Ill.
Picking the right ring
Given that studies show one-third of recipients of a surgical mitral ring or surgical mitral valve will require a repeat intervention within 10 years, she made a plea to surgeons: “If we are going to be treating patients with valve-in-ring TMVR, that means when surgeons do a repair they should pick a ring that is amenable to a ViR procedure. So don’t use flexible incomplete bands or very rigid rings because those are really difficult to treat later on. We should pick a ring thinking of the future. That ring is going to fail at some point, and when it fails it’s going to make our lives much easier if we’d picked the right ring.”
MAC TMVR needs more work
In the MAC arm of the MITRAL trial, 96 patients were screened so the researchers could find 30 candidates for TMVR. The 61 rejections were for high risk of left ventricular outflow tract obstruction (LVOTO), embolization, or both.
Fourteen patients underwent transseptal TMVR, and one with anatomy unsuitable for a transseptal procedure had a transapical approach. The other 15 patients had a transatrial surgical approach, which allows resection of the anterior leaflet to reduce the risk of LVOTO and placement of sutures to reduce the embolization risk. However, this came at the cost of increased mortality risk: Three of the five in-hospital deaths were in the transatrial TMVR group.
The technical success rate at exit from the cath lab in the MAC patients was 73%, with a 30-day procedural success rate of 46% and a 19% 30-day mortality. Three patients developed severe LVOTO with hemodynamic compromise.
One transseptal and one transapical TMVR were complicated by LVOTO, both treated by bailout alcohol septal ablation. This led Dr. Guerrero and her coinvestigators to the concept of preemptive alcohol septal ablation, which they used in seven patients deemed at high risk for LVOTO an average of 6 weeks prior to transseptal TMVR as a successful risk reduction strategy.
Survival climbing with operator experience
“In the early days of the TMVR MAC registry, the 30-day mortality rate was 37%. It came down to 22% in the middle third of the registry, then about 18% in the final third. Now we’ve got it down in MITRAL to 16.7%, but when you separate the rate in the transseptal versus the transatrial patients, it’s 13% versus 20%. The difference is not statistically significant, but it’s promising, and I think we are making great progress,” Dr. Guerrero said.
Safety and efficacy endpoints in MITRAL will be reported again at 1 year of follow-up.
The MITRAL trial was partially supported by Edwards Lifesciences. Dr. Guerrero reported receiving a research grant from that company and serving as a consultant to Tendyne Holdings/Abbott and on a speakers bureau for Abiomed.
SOURCE: Guerrero M. No abstract.
DENVER – Transseptal mitral valve implantation of an off-the-shelf, commercially available TAVR valve in high-surgical-risk patients with a failing surgically implanted mitral ring prosthesis has become a reasonable treatment strategy in light of the interim findings of the ground-breaking MITRAL trial, Mayra E. Guerrero, MD, said at the Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics annual educational meeting.
Her presentation of the preliminary results of the MITRAL (Mitral Implantation of Transcatheter Valves) trial showed this valve-in-ring (ViR) treatment strategy using the Sapien 3 valve was associated with low 30-day morbidity and mortality rates and impressive symptomatic improvement.
In contrast, another arm of the MITRAL trial showed that placement of the Sapien 3 TAVR valve in high-surgical-risk patients with severe mitral stenosis due to mitral annular calcification (MAC) of their native valve is a treatment strategy that’s not yet ready for prime time, she added at the meeting, which was sponsored by the Cardiovascular Research Foundation.
“Transcatheter mitral valve replacement in MAC is a challenging procedure associated with complications,” Dr. Guerrero observed. “It may become a reasonable alternative for high-surgical-risk patients with favorable anatomy, but techniques require further refinement.”
The ViR arm of the observational multicenter prospective MITRAL trial included 30 patients with extremely high surgical risk and either severe mitral stenosis as defined by a mitral valve area of 1.5 cm2 or less or moderate mitral stenosis plus severe mitral regurgitation. The most common type of failing ring was the Edwards Physio, in nine patients. Access for transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR) was transseptal in 100% of patients.
The technical success rate at exit from the catheterization lab was 70%. The procedural success rate at 30 days was 62%.
Six patients required a second valve. This was mainly because of malpositioning of the first valve with resultant mitral regurgitation; however, this problem became a nonissue as operator experience grew. All six affected patients were alive at 30 days, and four of the six were New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class I or II.
In-hospital and 30-day mortality rates were low. There was a single cardiovascular death and one noncardiac death in hospital, with no additional deaths through 30 days. No cases of stroke, acute MI, or valve embolization or thrombosis occurred. The mean mitral valve area at 30 days was 2.1 cm2, although three patients still had a mitral valve area of less 1.5 cm2. Three patients experienced acute renal failure requiring hemodialysis. Seventy-five percent of patients had no or trace mitral regurgitation by echocardiography; the rest had mild regurgitation.
Although at baseline more than 60% of the patients were New York Heart Association class III, 10% were class IV, and the rest were class II, at 30 days more than 30% were New York Heart Association class I, 40% were class II, and the rest were class III.
The 30-day all-cause mortality rate of 6.8% in the MITRAL study is roughly half that reported for ViR patients in the Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Valve Therapy Registry. Dr. Guerrero attributed this to refined procedural techniques and improved patient selection through the use of CT imaging and echocardiography.
Heart valve design changes, such as a longer inner skirt, might further improve the technical success rate for ViR, according to Dr. Guerrero, an interventional cardiologist at NorthShore University Health System in Evanston, Ill.
Picking the right ring
Given that studies show one-third of recipients of a surgical mitral ring or surgical mitral valve will require a repeat intervention within 10 years, she made a plea to surgeons: “If we are going to be treating patients with valve-in-ring TMVR, that means when surgeons do a repair they should pick a ring that is amenable to a ViR procedure. So don’t use flexible incomplete bands or very rigid rings because those are really difficult to treat later on. We should pick a ring thinking of the future. That ring is going to fail at some point, and when it fails it’s going to make our lives much easier if we’d picked the right ring.”
MAC TMVR needs more work
In the MAC arm of the MITRAL trial, 96 patients were screened so the researchers could find 30 candidates for TMVR. The 61 rejections were for high risk of left ventricular outflow tract obstruction (LVOTO), embolization, or both.
Fourteen patients underwent transseptal TMVR, and one with anatomy unsuitable for a transseptal procedure had a transapical approach. The other 15 patients had a transatrial surgical approach, which allows resection of the anterior leaflet to reduce the risk of LVOTO and placement of sutures to reduce the embolization risk. However, this came at the cost of increased mortality risk: Three of the five in-hospital deaths were in the transatrial TMVR group.
The technical success rate at exit from the cath lab in the MAC patients was 73%, with a 30-day procedural success rate of 46% and a 19% 30-day mortality. Three patients developed severe LVOTO with hemodynamic compromise.
One transseptal and one transapical TMVR were complicated by LVOTO, both treated by bailout alcohol septal ablation. This led Dr. Guerrero and her coinvestigators to the concept of preemptive alcohol septal ablation, which they used in seven patients deemed at high risk for LVOTO an average of 6 weeks prior to transseptal TMVR as a successful risk reduction strategy.
Survival climbing with operator experience
“In the early days of the TMVR MAC registry, the 30-day mortality rate was 37%. It came down to 22% in the middle third of the registry, then about 18% in the final third. Now we’ve got it down in MITRAL to 16.7%, but when you separate the rate in the transseptal versus the transatrial patients, it’s 13% versus 20%. The difference is not statistically significant, but it’s promising, and I think we are making great progress,” Dr. Guerrero said.
Safety and efficacy endpoints in MITRAL will be reported again at 1 year of follow-up.
The MITRAL trial was partially supported by Edwards Lifesciences. Dr. Guerrero reported receiving a research grant from that company and serving as a consultant to Tendyne Holdings/Abbott and on a speakers bureau for Abiomed.
SOURCE: Guerrero M. No abstract.
DENVER – Transseptal mitral valve implantation of an off-the-shelf, commercially available TAVR valve in high-surgical-risk patients with a failing surgically implanted mitral ring prosthesis has become a reasonable treatment strategy in light of the interim findings of the ground-breaking MITRAL trial, Mayra E. Guerrero, MD, said at the Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics annual educational meeting.
Her presentation of the preliminary results of the MITRAL (Mitral Implantation of Transcatheter Valves) trial showed this valve-in-ring (ViR) treatment strategy using the Sapien 3 valve was associated with low 30-day morbidity and mortality rates and impressive symptomatic improvement.
In contrast, another arm of the MITRAL trial showed that placement of the Sapien 3 TAVR valve in high-surgical-risk patients with severe mitral stenosis due to mitral annular calcification (MAC) of their native valve is a treatment strategy that’s not yet ready for prime time, she added at the meeting, which was sponsored by the Cardiovascular Research Foundation.
“Transcatheter mitral valve replacement in MAC is a challenging procedure associated with complications,” Dr. Guerrero observed. “It may become a reasonable alternative for high-surgical-risk patients with favorable anatomy, but techniques require further refinement.”
The ViR arm of the observational multicenter prospective MITRAL trial included 30 patients with extremely high surgical risk and either severe mitral stenosis as defined by a mitral valve area of 1.5 cm2 or less or moderate mitral stenosis plus severe mitral regurgitation. The most common type of failing ring was the Edwards Physio, in nine patients. Access for transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR) was transseptal in 100% of patients.
The technical success rate at exit from the catheterization lab was 70%. The procedural success rate at 30 days was 62%.
Six patients required a second valve. This was mainly because of malpositioning of the first valve with resultant mitral regurgitation; however, this problem became a nonissue as operator experience grew. All six affected patients were alive at 30 days, and four of the six were New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class I or II.
In-hospital and 30-day mortality rates were low. There was a single cardiovascular death and one noncardiac death in hospital, with no additional deaths through 30 days. No cases of stroke, acute MI, or valve embolization or thrombosis occurred. The mean mitral valve area at 30 days was 2.1 cm2, although three patients still had a mitral valve area of less 1.5 cm2. Three patients experienced acute renal failure requiring hemodialysis. Seventy-five percent of patients had no or trace mitral regurgitation by echocardiography; the rest had mild regurgitation.
Although at baseline more than 60% of the patients were New York Heart Association class III, 10% were class IV, and the rest were class II, at 30 days more than 30% were New York Heart Association class I, 40% were class II, and the rest were class III.
The 30-day all-cause mortality rate of 6.8% in the MITRAL study is roughly half that reported for ViR patients in the Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Valve Therapy Registry. Dr. Guerrero attributed this to refined procedural techniques and improved patient selection through the use of CT imaging and echocardiography.
Heart valve design changes, such as a longer inner skirt, might further improve the technical success rate for ViR, according to Dr. Guerrero, an interventional cardiologist at NorthShore University Health System in Evanston, Ill.
Picking the right ring
Given that studies show one-third of recipients of a surgical mitral ring or surgical mitral valve will require a repeat intervention within 10 years, she made a plea to surgeons: “If we are going to be treating patients with valve-in-ring TMVR, that means when surgeons do a repair they should pick a ring that is amenable to a ViR procedure. So don’t use flexible incomplete bands or very rigid rings because those are really difficult to treat later on. We should pick a ring thinking of the future. That ring is going to fail at some point, and when it fails it’s going to make our lives much easier if we’d picked the right ring.”
MAC TMVR needs more work
In the MAC arm of the MITRAL trial, 96 patients were screened so the researchers could find 30 candidates for TMVR. The 61 rejections were for high risk of left ventricular outflow tract obstruction (LVOTO), embolization, or both.
Fourteen patients underwent transseptal TMVR, and one with anatomy unsuitable for a transseptal procedure had a transapical approach. The other 15 patients had a transatrial surgical approach, which allows resection of the anterior leaflet to reduce the risk of LVOTO and placement of sutures to reduce the embolization risk. However, this came at the cost of increased mortality risk: Three of the five in-hospital deaths were in the transatrial TMVR group.
The technical success rate at exit from the cath lab in the MAC patients was 73%, with a 30-day procedural success rate of 46% and a 19% 30-day mortality. Three patients developed severe LVOTO with hemodynamic compromise.
One transseptal and one transapical TMVR were complicated by LVOTO, both treated by bailout alcohol septal ablation. This led Dr. Guerrero and her coinvestigators to the concept of preemptive alcohol septal ablation, which they used in seven patients deemed at high risk for LVOTO an average of 6 weeks prior to transseptal TMVR as a successful risk reduction strategy.
Survival climbing with operator experience
“In the early days of the TMVR MAC registry, the 30-day mortality rate was 37%. It came down to 22% in the middle third of the registry, then about 18% in the final third. Now we’ve got it down in MITRAL to 16.7%, but when you separate the rate in the transseptal versus the transatrial patients, it’s 13% versus 20%. The difference is not statistically significant, but it’s promising, and I think we are making great progress,” Dr. Guerrero said.
Safety and efficacy endpoints in MITRAL will be reported again at 1 year of follow-up.
The MITRAL trial was partially supported by Edwards Lifesciences. Dr. Guerrero reported receiving a research grant from that company and serving as a consultant to Tendyne Holdings/Abbott and on a speakers bureau for Abiomed.
SOURCE: Guerrero M. No abstract.
REPORTING FROM TCT 2017
Key clinical point: .
Major finding: Thirty-day all-cause mortality following a transcatheter valve-in-ring procedure in unacceptably high surgical-risk patients with severe mitral valve disease due to a failing annuloplasty ring was 6.8%.
Study details: This prospective observational study included 60 patients who underwent transcatheter mitral valve replacement for severe mitral valve disease, half due to a failed annuloplasty ring and half secondary to mitral annular calcification.
Disclosures: The MITRAL trial was partially supported by Edwards Lifesciences. The study presenter reported receiving a research grant from the company.
Source: Guerrero M. No abstract.
New frontier in TAVR is bicuspid disease
DENVER – Thirty-day transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) outcomes in real-world clinical practice using the Evolut R self-expanding valve were as good in patients treated for bicuspid disease as for tricuspid disease, according to a retrospective analysis of the Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Valve Therapy (STS/ACC TVT) national registry.
“I’ve always been insecure about whether we have the right technology to be able to treat bicuspid disease. This registry data is reassuring to me that we might. I think it may be time to do a prospective registry for low-surgical-risk patients with bicuspid disease and see if we can emulate these kinds of results,” said Dr. Popma, the director of interventional cardiology at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and a professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School, both in Boston.
“I think that the one limitation to recruitment in our low-risk TAVR trial is patients with bicuspid disease. Probably 25%-30% of low-risk patients are bicuspid, so we can’t include them right now in our low-risk trial,” he added at the meeting sponsored by the Cardiovascular Research Foundation.
Even though TAVR for patients with bicuspid disease is off-label, operators do perform the procedure. All of these cases are captured in the STS/ACC TVT registry. Dr. Popma reported on 6,717 patients who underwent TAVR with placement of the Evolut R valve at 305 U.S. centers during 2014-2016. The purpose of this retrospective study was to compare 30-day outcomes in the 191 TAVR patients with native valve bicuspid disease with the outcomes in the 6,526 with tricuspid disease.
The two groups were evenly matched in terms of key baseline characteristics, including aortic valve mean gradient, severity of aortic, mitral, and tricuspid regurgitation, and comorbid conditions – with the exception of coronary artery disease, which was present in 48% of the bicuspid group versus 65% of those with tricuspid disease. Also, the bicuspid disease group was younger by an average of nearly 9 years, and their mean baseline left ventricular ejection fraction of 52.5% was lower than the LVEF of 55.5% seen in the tricuspid group.
Procedure time averaged 126 minutes in the bicuspid group and 116 in the tricuspid group. Femoral access was utilized in 87% of the bicuspid patients and in 92% of tricuspid patients. The device was implanted successfully in 97% of the bicuspid group and in 99% of the tricuspid group. More than one valve was required in 3.7% of the bicuspid disease group, a rate similar to that in the tricuspid group. Total hospital length of stay was roughly 6 days in both groups.
Rates of symptomatic improvement at 30 days were closely similar in the two groups. Preprocedurally, two-thirds of patients in both groups had a New York Heart Association class III; at 30 days, however, that was true for a mere 2.4% of the bicuspid patients and 10.3% of the tricuspid patients. By day 30, 52% of the bicuspid group and 48% of the tricuspid group were NYHA class I.
No or only trace aortic regurgitation was present at 30 days in 62% of the bicuspid group and in 61% of the tricuspid group, while mild aortic regurgitation was noted in 31% and 33%, respectively.
Thirty-day mean aortic valve gradient improved to a similar extent in the two groups: from a baseline of 47.2 mm Hg to 9.4 mm Hg in the bicuspid group and from 42.9 mm Hg to 7.5 mm Hg in the tricuspid group.
Dr. Popma noted that an earlier analysis he carried out comparing outcomes of TAVR using the earlier-generation CoreValve in bicuspid versus tricuspid disease showed suboptimal rates of paravalvular regurgitation and an increased need for multiple valves in the bicuspid group.
“The lesson is ‘Thank God we’ve got new technology!’ because the new technology has made a big difference for us,” the cardiologist observed. “We think that the advancement in the technique and the advancement in the valves is going to give us fairly comparable outcomes with Evolut in bicuspid and tricuspid patients.”
Discussant Hasan Jilaihawi, MD, a codirector of transcatheter valve therapy at New York University, pronounced the short-term outcomes in patients with bicuspid aortic valve disease “better than I would have expected,” adding that he, too, thinks it’s time for a prospective registry study of the Evolut valve in such patients.
Dr. Popma’s study was supported by Medtronic. He reported having received research grants from Medtronic and other medical device companies.
SOURCE: Popma JJ. TCT 2017.
DENVER – Thirty-day transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) outcomes in real-world clinical practice using the Evolut R self-expanding valve were as good in patients treated for bicuspid disease as for tricuspid disease, according to a retrospective analysis of the Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Valve Therapy (STS/ACC TVT) national registry.
“I’ve always been insecure about whether we have the right technology to be able to treat bicuspid disease. This registry data is reassuring to me that we might. I think it may be time to do a prospective registry for low-surgical-risk patients with bicuspid disease and see if we can emulate these kinds of results,” said Dr. Popma, the director of interventional cardiology at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and a professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School, both in Boston.
“I think that the one limitation to recruitment in our low-risk TAVR trial is patients with bicuspid disease. Probably 25%-30% of low-risk patients are bicuspid, so we can’t include them right now in our low-risk trial,” he added at the meeting sponsored by the Cardiovascular Research Foundation.
Even though TAVR for patients with bicuspid disease is off-label, operators do perform the procedure. All of these cases are captured in the STS/ACC TVT registry. Dr. Popma reported on 6,717 patients who underwent TAVR with placement of the Evolut R valve at 305 U.S. centers during 2014-2016. The purpose of this retrospective study was to compare 30-day outcomes in the 191 TAVR patients with native valve bicuspid disease with the outcomes in the 6,526 with tricuspid disease.
The two groups were evenly matched in terms of key baseline characteristics, including aortic valve mean gradient, severity of aortic, mitral, and tricuspid regurgitation, and comorbid conditions – with the exception of coronary artery disease, which was present in 48% of the bicuspid group versus 65% of those with tricuspid disease. Also, the bicuspid disease group was younger by an average of nearly 9 years, and their mean baseline left ventricular ejection fraction of 52.5% was lower than the LVEF of 55.5% seen in the tricuspid group.
Procedure time averaged 126 minutes in the bicuspid group and 116 in the tricuspid group. Femoral access was utilized in 87% of the bicuspid patients and in 92% of tricuspid patients. The device was implanted successfully in 97% of the bicuspid group and in 99% of the tricuspid group. More than one valve was required in 3.7% of the bicuspid disease group, a rate similar to that in the tricuspid group. Total hospital length of stay was roughly 6 days in both groups.
Rates of symptomatic improvement at 30 days were closely similar in the two groups. Preprocedurally, two-thirds of patients in both groups had a New York Heart Association class III; at 30 days, however, that was true for a mere 2.4% of the bicuspid patients and 10.3% of the tricuspid patients. By day 30, 52% of the bicuspid group and 48% of the tricuspid group were NYHA class I.
No or only trace aortic regurgitation was present at 30 days in 62% of the bicuspid group and in 61% of the tricuspid group, while mild aortic regurgitation was noted in 31% and 33%, respectively.
Thirty-day mean aortic valve gradient improved to a similar extent in the two groups: from a baseline of 47.2 mm Hg to 9.4 mm Hg in the bicuspid group and from 42.9 mm Hg to 7.5 mm Hg in the tricuspid group.
Dr. Popma noted that an earlier analysis he carried out comparing outcomes of TAVR using the earlier-generation CoreValve in bicuspid versus tricuspid disease showed suboptimal rates of paravalvular regurgitation and an increased need for multiple valves in the bicuspid group.
“The lesson is ‘Thank God we’ve got new technology!’ because the new technology has made a big difference for us,” the cardiologist observed. “We think that the advancement in the technique and the advancement in the valves is going to give us fairly comparable outcomes with Evolut in bicuspid and tricuspid patients.”
Discussant Hasan Jilaihawi, MD, a codirector of transcatheter valve therapy at New York University, pronounced the short-term outcomes in patients with bicuspid aortic valve disease “better than I would have expected,” adding that he, too, thinks it’s time for a prospective registry study of the Evolut valve in such patients.
Dr. Popma’s study was supported by Medtronic. He reported having received research grants from Medtronic and other medical device companies.
SOURCE: Popma JJ. TCT 2017.
DENVER – Thirty-day transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) outcomes in real-world clinical practice using the Evolut R self-expanding valve were as good in patients treated for bicuspid disease as for tricuspid disease, according to a retrospective analysis of the Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Valve Therapy (STS/ACC TVT) national registry.
“I’ve always been insecure about whether we have the right technology to be able to treat bicuspid disease. This registry data is reassuring to me that we might. I think it may be time to do a prospective registry for low-surgical-risk patients with bicuspid disease and see if we can emulate these kinds of results,” said Dr. Popma, the director of interventional cardiology at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and a professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School, both in Boston.
“I think that the one limitation to recruitment in our low-risk TAVR trial is patients with bicuspid disease. Probably 25%-30% of low-risk patients are bicuspid, so we can’t include them right now in our low-risk trial,” he added at the meeting sponsored by the Cardiovascular Research Foundation.
Even though TAVR for patients with bicuspid disease is off-label, operators do perform the procedure. All of these cases are captured in the STS/ACC TVT registry. Dr. Popma reported on 6,717 patients who underwent TAVR with placement of the Evolut R valve at 305 U.S. centers during 2014-2016. The purpose of this retrospective study was to compare 30-day outcomes in the 191 TAVR patients with native valve bicuspid disease with the outcomes in the 6,526 with tricuspid disease.
The two groups were evenly matched in terms of key baseline characteristics, including aortic valve mean gradient, severity of aortic, mitral, and tricuspid regurgitation, and comorbid conditions – with the exception of coronary artery disease, which was present in 48% of the bicuspid group versus 65% of those with tricuspid disease. Also, the bicuspid disease group was younger by an average of nearly 9 years, and their mean baseline left ventricular ejection fraction of 52.5% was lower than the LVEF of 55.5% seen in the tricuspid group.
Procedure time averaged 126 minutes in the bicuspid group and 116 in the tricuspid group. Femoral access was utilized in 87% of the bicuspid patients and in 92% of tricuspid patients. The device was implanted successfully in 97% of the bicuspid group and in 99% of the tricuspid group. More than one valve was required in 3.7% of the bicuspid disease group, a rate similar to that in the tricuspid group. Total hospital length of stay was roughly 6 days in both groups.
Rates of symptomatic improvement at 30 days were closely similar in the two groups. Preprocedurally, two-thirds of patients in both groups had a New York Heart Association class III; at 30 days, however, that was true for a mere 2.4% of the bicuspid patients and 10.3% of the tricuspid patients. By day 30, 52% of the bicuspid group and 48% of the tricuspid group were NYHA class I.
No or only trace aortic regurgitation was present at 30 days in 62% of the bicuspid group and in 61% of the tricuspid group, while mild aortic regurgitation was noted in 31% and 33%, respectively.
Thirty-day mean aortic valve gradient improved to a similar extent in the two groups: from a baseline of 47.2 mm Hg to 9.4 mm Hg in the bicuspid group and from 42.9 mm Hg to 7.5 mm Hg in the tricuspid group.
Dr. Popma noted that an earlier analysis he carried out comparing outcomes of TAVR using the earlier-generation CoreValve in bicuspid versus tricuspid disease showed suboptimal rates of paravalvular regurgitation and an increased need for multiple valves in the bicuspid group.
“The lesson is ‘Thank God we’ve got new technology!’ because the new technology has made a big difference for us,” the cardiologist observed. “We think that the advancement in the technique and the advancement in the valves is going to give us fairly comparable outcomes with Evolut in bicuspid and tricuspid patients.”
Discussant Hasan Jilaihawi, MD, a codirector of transcatheter valve therapy at New York University, pronounced the short-term outcomes in patients with bicuspid aortic valve disease “better than I would have expected,” adding that he, too, thinks it’s time for a prospective registry study of the Evolut valve in such patients.
Dr. Popma’s study was supported by Medtronic. He reported having received research grants from Medtronic and other medical device companies.
SOURCE: Popma JJ. TCT 2017.
REPORTING FROM TCT 2017
Key clinical point:
Major finding: Thirty-day clinical outcomes and symptomatic improvement were reassuringly similar both in TAVR patients who received the Evolut R valve for tricuspid disease and off-label for bicuspid disease.
Study details: This was a retrospective U.S. national registry study comparing 30-day outcomes in 191 TAVR patients with native valve bicuspid disease and 6,526 with tricuspid disease, all of whom underwent TAVR with placement of the Evolut R valve.
Disclosures: The study presenter reported having received research grants from Medtronic, the study sponsor, as well as other medical device companies.
Source: Popma JJ. TCT 2017.
New anticoagulants pose challenges for surgeons
SAN DIEGO – A new class of is now commonly seen in patients and can require new strategies for management in the surgical setting. New drugs to reverse anticoagulation agents now need to be routinely considered in advance of surgery.
“They’re all over the place. It feels like everyone I see is on an anticoagulant, especially the new anticoagulants,” said Carlos V.R. Brown, MD, FACS, associate professor of surgery and chief of the division of acute care surgery at the University of Texas at Austin. “There’s a lot more learning that has to take place into how these medications work and how to take care of patients who use them.”
“Warfarin is slow, unpredictable, and requires monitoring and dose adjustment,” he said. In addition, interactions with food and other medications can be problematic, he said. The injectable drug heparin, meanwhile, requires monitoring and frequent dose adjustments, he said. “We’re in search of the ideal anticoagulant – one that’s oral, has a wide therapeutic window, is very predictable with rapid onset, and has minimal interaction with other food or drugs.”
Here’s the hitch, he said: “It probably doesn’t exist.”
There are now several alternatives to the old standbys on the market. One class, the direct thrombin inhibitor, is led by dabigatran etexilate (Pradaxa). Another class, the factor Xa inhibitors, includes rivaroxaban (Xarelto), apixaban (Eliquis), and edoxaban (Savaysa). From an elective surgery standpoint, Dr. Brown said in an interview, it has become important to understand how to reverse the effects of anticoagulants before a procedure.
To determine levels of the drugs, a TT (thrombin time) screening test is recommended for dabigatran and an anti-Xa test for rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban said Dr. Brown, referring to a 2017 study published in Critical Care Clinics. The paper summarized the available evidence and provided the optimal reversal strategy for bleeding patients with trauma on novel oral anticoagulants. The report also noted that newer blood thinners have a half-life of 7 or 12 hours and reach peak plasma level at 1-4 hours, depending on the medication (Crit Care Clin. 2017;33[1]135-52).
There may be no time to determine blood thinner levels in emergency situations. In those cases, patient or caregiver history about recent doses can be crucial, Dr. Brown said. “Knowing the patient’s history is going to be a key component,” he said.
Surgeons can turn to a variety of options to reverse the newer anticoagulants in an emergent setting, but only dabigatran has a Food and Drug Administration–approved reversal agent. Activated charcoal, PCC (Kcentra) and aPCC (FEIBA) can reverse dabigatran and oral factor Xa inhibitors, Dr. Brown said. Dialysis is also an option for dabigatran.
Another option to reverse dabigatran may be idarucizumab (Praxbind), a reversal agent. A 2017 industry-funded, open-label study reported successful results. It has been shown to work rapidly, Dr. Brown said, and the drug is now FDA approved (N Engl J Med. 2017 Aug 3;377[5]:431-41).
For oral factor Xa inhibitors, Dr. Brown said, andexanet alfa is now in a trial and doesn’t yet have FDA approval. “Presumably, it will provide a benefit over PCC because it’s directed at that specific medication,” he said.
Dr. Brown cautioned about the risks of reversing anticoagulants. “Any time you’re reversing an anticoagulant, the side effect is going to be clotting,” boosting the likelihood of events such as heart attack or stroke, he said. “You’re always weighing the risk versus the benefit of reversing.”
Dr. Brown has no relevant disclosures.
SAN DIEGO – A new class of is now commonly seen in patients and can require new strategies for management in the surgical setting. New drugs to reverse anticoagulation agents now need to be routinely considered in advance of surgery.
“They’re all over the place. It feels like everyone I see is on an anticoagulant, especially the new anticoagulants,” said Carlos V.R. Brown, MD, FACS, associate professor of surgery and chief of the division of acute care surgery at the University of Texas at Austin. “There’s a lot more learning that has to take place into how these medications work and how to take care of patients who use them.”
“Warfarin is slow, unpredictable, and requires monitoring and dose adjustment,” he said. In addition, interactions with food and other medications can be problematic, he said. The injectable drug heparin, meanwhile, requires monitoring and frequent dose adjustments, he said. “We’re in search of the ideal anticoagulant – one that’s oral, has a wide therapeutic window, is very predictable with rapid onset, and has minimal interaction with other food or drugs.”
Here’s the hitch, he said: “It probably doesn’t exist.”
There are now several alternatives to the old standbys on the market. One class, the direct thrombin inhibitor, is led by dabigatran etexilate (Pradaxa). Another class, the factor Xa inhibitors, includes rivaroxaban (Xarelto), apixaban (Eliquis), and edoxaban (Savaysa). From an elective surgery standpoint, Dr. Brown said in an interview, it has become important to understand how to reverse the effects of anticoagulants before a procedure.
To determine levels of the drugs, a TT (thrombin time) screening test is recommended for dabigatran and an anti-Xa test for rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban said Dr. Brown, referring to a 2017 study published in Critical Care Clinics. The paper summarized the available evidence and provided the optimal reversal strategy for bleeding patients with trauma on novel oral anticoagulants. The report also noted that newer blood thinners have a half-life of 7 or 12 hours and reach peak plasma level at 1-4 hours, depending on the medication (Crit Care Clin. 2017;33[1]135-52).
There may be no time to determine blood thinner levels in emergency situations. In those cases, patient or caregiver history about recent doses can be crucial, Dr. Brown said. “Knowing the patient’s history is going to be a key component,” he said.
Surgeons can turn to a variety of options to reverse the newer anticoagulants in an emergent setting, but only dabigatran has a Food and Drug Administration–approved reversal agent. Activated charcoal, PCC (Kcentra) and aPCC (FEIBA) can reverse dabigatran and oral factor Xa inhibitors, Dr. Brown said. Dialysis is also an option for dabigatran.
Another option to reverse dabigatran may be idarucizumab (Praxbind), a reversal agent. A 2017 industry-funded, open-label study reported successful results. It has been shown to work rapidly, Dr. Brown said, and the drug is now FDA approved (N Engl J Med. 2017 Aug 3;377[5]:431-41).
For oral factor Xa inhibitors, Dr. Brown said, andexanet alfa is now in a trial and doesn’t yet have FDA approval. “Presumably, it will provide a benefit over PCC because it’s directed at that specific medication,” he said.
Dr. Brown cautioned about the risks of reversing anticoagulants. “Any time you’re reversing an anticoagulant, the side effect is going to be clotting,” boosting the likelihood of events such as heart attack or stroke, he said. “You’re always weighing the risk versus the benefit of reversing.”
Dr. Brown has no relevant disclosures.
SAN DIEGO – A new class of is now commonly seen in patients and can require new strategies for management in the surgical setting. New drugs to reverse anticoagulation agents now need to be routinely considered in advance of surgery.
“They’re all over the place. It feels like everyone I see is on an anticoagulant, especially the new anticoagulants,” said Carlos V.R. Brown, MD, FACS, associate professor of surgery and chief of the division of acute care surgery at the University of Texas at Austin. “There’s a lot more learning that has to take place into how these medications work and how to take care of patients who use them.”
“Warfarin is slow, unpredictable, and requires monitoring and dose adjustment,” he said. In addition, interactions with food and other medications can be problematic, he said. The injectable drug heparin, meanwhile, requires monitoring and frequent dose adjustments, he said. “We’re in search of the ideal anticoagulant – one that’s oral, has a wide therapeutic window, is very predictable with rapid onset, and has minimal interaction with other food or drugs.”
Here’s the hitch, he said: “It probably doesn’t exist.”
There are now several alternatives to the old standbys on the market. One class, the direct thrombin inhibitor, is led by dabigatran etexilate (Pradaxa). Another class, the factor Xa inhibitors, includes rivaroxaban (Xarelto), apixaban (Eliquis), and edoxaban (Savaysa). From an elective surgery standpoint, Dr. Brown said in an interview, it has become important to understand how to reverse the effects of anticoagulants before a procedure.
To determine levels of the drugs, a TT (thrombin time) screening test is recommended for dabigatran and an anti-Xa test for rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban said Dr. Brown, referring to a 2017 study published in Critical Care Clinics. The paper summarized the available evidence and provided the optimal reversal strategy for bleeding patients with trauma on novel oral anticoagulants. The report also noted that newer blood thinners have a half-life of 7 or 12 hours and reach peak plasma level at 1-4 hours, depending on the medication (Crit Care Clin. 2017;33[1]135-52).
There may be no time to determine blood thinner levels in emergency situations. In those cases, patient or caregiver history about recent doses can be crucial, Dr. Brown said. “Knowing the patient’s history is going to be a key component,” he said.
Surgeons can turn to a variety of options to reverse the newer anticoagulants in an emergent setting, but only dabigatran has a Food and Drug Administration–approved reversal agent. Activated charcoal, PCC (Kcentra) and aPCC (FEIBA) can reverse dabigatran and oral factor Xa inhibitors, Dr. Brown said. Dialysis is also an option for dabigatran.
Another option to reverse dabigatran may be idarucizumab (Praxbind), a reversal agent. A 2017 industry-funded, open-label study reported successful results. It has been shown to work rapidly, Dr. Brown said, and the drug is now FDA approved (N Engl J Med. 2017 Aug 3;377[5]:431-41).
For oral factor Xa inhibitors, Dr. Brown said, andexanet alfa is now in a trial and doesn’t yet have FDA approval. “Presumably, it will provide a benefit over PCC because it’s directed at that specific medication,” he said.
Dr. Brown cautioned about the risks of reversing anticoagulants. “Any time you’re reversing an anticoagulant, the side effect is going to be clotting,” boosting the likelihood of events such as heart attack or stroke, he said. “You’re always weighing the risk versus the benefit of reversing.”
Dr. Brown has no relevant disclosures.
EXPERT OPINION FROM THE ACS CLINICAL CONGRESS
Bilateral ACP shown similar to unilateral in arch replacement study
What may be the largest study comparing unilateral and bilateral antegrade cerebral perfusion during total arch replacement for type A aortic dissection has reported that outcomes between the two approaches are comparable, although the bilateral approach showed some advantages during the operation itself, investigators from China reported in the Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery (2017;154:767-75).
The effectiveness of bilateral antegrade cerebral perfusion (b-ACP) vs. unilateral antegrade cerebral perfusion (u-ACP) has been the focus of extensive debate, lead study author Guang Tong, MD, of the Guangzhou (China) General Hospital, and coauthors said. They compared outcomes in six different metrics, ranging from cardiopulmonary bypass time to length of stay (LOS) in the ICU and hospital, in 203 patients with type A aortic dissection who had total aortic arch replacement with hypothermic circulatory arrest over an 8-year period ending in August 2014; 121 had b-ACP and 82 had u-ACP. “The issue of u-ACP vs. b-ACP has been examined in aortic arch surgery, but few reports have focused on type A aortic dissection,” Dr. Tong and coauthors wrote.
They acknowledged that some surgeons are reluctant to use b-ACP because of its complexity, but their study found no increase in cross-clamp time, cardiopulmonary bypass time, or surgery time in the b-ACP group. They cited another reason surgeons give for avoiding b-ACP: the risk of embolic injury caused by canulating the left common carotid artery in an atheromatous aorta. “In the present study, this risk was avoided by attaching the left common carotid artery to the four-branched prosthetic graft for left hemisphere perfusion,” Dr. Tong and coauthors wrote.
Key outcomes that the researchers found not statistically significant were:
- Overall 30-day mortality (11.6% for b-ACP vs. 20.7% for u-ACP; P = .075).
- Prevalence of postoperative permanent neurologic dysfunction (8.4% vs. 16.9%; P = .091).
- Average ICU LOS (16 ± 17.75 days vs. 17 ± 11.5 days, P =.454).
- Average hospital LOS (26.5 ± 20.6 days vs. 24.8 ± 10.3 days, P = .434).
However, average ventilation time was lower in the b-ACP group (95.5 hours vs. 147 hours; P less than or equal to.001).
Dr. Tong and coauthors used an aggressive approach, as advocated by Dhaval Trivedi, MD, and colleagues (Ann Thorac Surg. 2016;101:896-903), and had a total arch replacement rate of 57.8%. This rate is higher than most published series in the west but comparable to other studies from China, perhaps because of the relatively young age of this study cohort – an average age of 51 years – compared to data sets other studies have used. Dr. Tong and coauthors used a b-ACP strategy that established both cerebral perfusion routes before circulatory arrest.
Rates of the following complications were also not significantly different across the study population: paraplegia (2.8% for b-ACP vs. 3.1% for u-ACP), temporary neurologic dysfunction (4.7% vs. 9.2%), permanent neurologic dysfunction (8.4% vs. 16.9%), renal failure (18% vs. 23.1%), reoperation for bleeding (2.8% vs. 4.6%), and mediastinal infection (3.7% vs. 6.2%).
While b-ACP patients did not have a statistically significant lower incidence of TND, Dr. Tong and coauthors noted the shorter time on ventilation and significantly lower tracheostomy rates for the b-ACP patients, 3.7% vs. 16.9% for the u-ACP group (P = .003). “In our institute, protocols to wean patients from ventilation were normally initiated as soon as consciousness was regained,” Dr. Tong and coauthors wrote.
Among the study limits Dr. Tong and coauthors acknowledged were its retrospective, nonrandomized, single-center nature, and the fact that the surgeries were performed over an 8-year period representing different eras.
The investigators reported having no relevant financial disclosures.
The study by Dr. Tong and coauthors adds to the discussion between the “bilateralists” and “unilateralists,” as Jean Bachet, MD, called the two prevailing camps on cerebral perfusion strategies in his invited commentary (J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2017;154:765-6). And while most clinical reports find outcomes similar between the two approaches, the evidence favors the bilateral approach for total arch replacement.
Citing how the study implied mortality and neurologic morbidity rates almost half those for unilateral perfusion, but not reaching statistical significance, Dr. Bachet said, “The statisticians would say that this is only a trend and no proof, but some trends might be indicative, and significance might only be a matter of number in each arm of the comparison.”
Dr. Bachet raised a question about the unilateral approach – that once the arch is opened it takes a minute or so to insert the small balloon canula into the origin of the left carotid artery or divided vessel and start bilateral perfusion. “A major question arises,” said Dr. Bachet: “Why should we expose our patients to any undue risk just to avoid a simple maneuver, to spare a little time, or for any other fancy and questionable reason?”
Cardiologists have raised that question for more than 20 years. Said Dr. Bachet, “We still wait for the answer.”
Dr. Bachet is a cardiac surgeon in Surgenes, France. He reported having no financial relationships to disclose.
The study by Dr. Tong and coauthors adds to the discussion between the “bilateralists” and “unilateralists,” as Jean Bachet, MD, called the two prevailing camps on cerebral perfusion strategies in his invited commentary (J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2017;154:765-6). And while most clinical reports find outcomes similar between the two approaches, the evidence favors the bilateral approach for total arch replacement.
Citing how the study implied mortality and neurologic morbidity rates almost half those for unilateral perfusion, but not reaching statistical significance, Dr. Bachet said, “The statisticians would say that this is only a trend and no proof, but some trends might be indicative, and significance might only be a matter of number in each arm of the comparison.”
Dr. Bachet raised a question about the unilateral approach – that once the arch is opened it takes a minute or so to insert the small balloon canula into the origin of the left carotid artery or divided vessel and start bilateral perfusion. “A major question arises,” said Dr. Bachet: “Why should we expose our patients to any undue risk just to avoid a simple maneuver, to spare a little time, or for any other fancy and questionable reason?”
Cardiologists have raised that question for more than 20 years. Said Dr. Bachet, “We still wait for the answer.”
Dr. Bachet is a cardiac surgeon in Surgenes, France. He reported having no financial relationships to disclose.
The study by Dr. Tong and coauthors adds to the discussion between the “bilateralists” and “unilateralists,” as Jean Bachet, MD, called the two prevailing camps on cerebral perfusion strategies in his invited commentary (J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2017;154:765-6). And while most clinical reports find outcomes similar between the two approaches, the evidence favors the bilateral approach for total arch replacement.
Citing how the study implied mortality and neurologic morbidity rates almost half those for unilateral perfusion, but not reaching statistical significance, Dr. Bachet said, “The statisticians would say that this is only a trend and no proof, but some trends might be indicative, and significance might only be a matter of number in each arm of the comparison.”
Dr. Bachet raised a question about the unilateral approach – that once the arch is opened it takes a minute or so to insert the small balloon canula into the origin of the left carotid artery or divided vessel and start bilateral perfusion. “A major question arises,” said Dr. Bachet: “Why should we expose our patients to any undue risk just to avoid a simple maneuver, to spare a little time, or for any other fancy and questionable reason?”
Cardiologists have raised that question for more than 20 years. Said Dr. Bachet, “We still wait for the answer.”
Dr. Bachet is a cardiac surgeon in Surgenes, France. He reported having no financial relationships to disclose.
What may be the largest study comparing unilateral and bilateral antegrade cerebral perfusion during total arch replacement for type A aortic dissection has reported that outcomes between the two approaches are comparable, although the bilateral approach showed some advantages during the operation itself, investigators from China reported in the Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery (2017;154:767-75).
The effectiveness of bilateral antegrade cerebral perfusion (b-ACP) vs. unilateral antegrade cerebral perfusion (u-ACP) has been the focus of extensive debate, lead study author Guang Tong, MD, of the Guangzhou (China) General Hospital, and coauthors said. They compared outcomes in six different metrics, ranging from cardiopulmonary bypass time to length of stay (LOS) in the ICU and hospital, in 203 patients with type A aortic dissection who had total aortic arch replacement with hypothermic circulatory arrest over an 8-year period ending in August 2014; 121 had b-ACP and 82 had u-ACP. “The issue of u-ACP vs. b-ACP has been examined in aortic arch surgery, but few reports have focused on type A aortic dissection,” Dr. Tong and coauthors wrote.
They acknowledged that some surgeons are reluctant to use b-ACP because of its complexity, but their study found no increase in cross-clamp time, cardiopulmonary bypass time, or surgery time in the b-ACP group. They cited another reason surgeons give for avoiding b-ACP: the risk of embolic injury caused by canulating the left common carotid artery in an atheromatous aorta. “In the present study, this risk was avoided by attaching the left common carotid artery to the four-branched prosthetic graft for left hemisphere perfusion,” Dr. Tong and coauthors wrote.
Key outcomes that the researchers found not statistically significant were:
- Overall 30-day mortality (11.6% for b-ACP vs. 20.7% for u-ACP; P = .075).
- Prevalence of postoperative permanent neurologic dysfunction (8.4% vs. 16.9%; P = .091).
- Average ICU LOS (16 ± 17.75 days vs. 17 ± 11.5 days, P =.454).
- Average hospital LOS (26.5 ± 20.6 days vs. 24.8 ± 10.3 days, P = .434).
However, average ventilation time was lower in the b-ACP group (95.5 hours vs. 147 hours; P less than or equal to.001).
Dr. Tong and coauthors used an aggressive approach, as advocated by Dhaval Trivedi, MD, and colleagues (Ann Thorac Surg. 2016;101:896-903), and had a total arch replacement rate of 57.8%. This rate is higher than most published series in the west but comparable to other studies from China, perhaps because of the relatively young age of this study cohort – an average age of 51 years – compared to data sets other studies have used. Dr. Tong and coauthors used a b-ACP strategy that established both cerebral perfusion routes before circulatory arrest.
Rates of the following complications were also not significantly different across the study population: paraplegia (2.8% for b-ACP vs. 3.1% for u-ACP), temporary neurologic dysfunction (4.7% vs. 9.2%), permanent neurologic dysfunction (8.4% vs. 16.9%), renal failure (18% vs. 23.1%), reoperation for bleeding (2.8% vs. 4.6%), and mediastinal infection (3.7% vs. 6.2%).
While b-ACP patients did not have a statistically significant lower incidence of TND, Dr. Tong and coauthors noted the shorter time on ventilation and significantly lower tracheostomy rates for the b-ACP patients, 3.7% vs. 16.9% for the u-ACP group (P = .003). “In our institute, protocols to wean patients from ventilation were normally initiated as soon as consciousness was regained,” Dr. Tong and coauthors wrote.
Among the study limits Dr. Tong and coauthors acknowledged were its retrospective, nonrandomized, single-center nature, and the fact that the surgeries were performed over an 8-year period representing different eras.
The investigators reported having no relevant financial disclosures.
What may be the largest study comparing unilateral and bilateral antegrade cerebral perfusion during total arch replacement for type A aortic dissection has reported that outcomes between the two approaches are comparable, although the bilateral approach showed some advantages during the operation itself, investigators from China reported in the Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery (2017;154:767-75).
The effectiveness of bilateral antegrade cerebral perfusion (b-ACP) vs. unilateral antegrade cerebral perfusion (u-ACP) has been the focus of extensive debate, lead study author Guang Tong, MD, of the Guangzhou (China) General Hospital, and coauthors said. They compared outcomes in six different metrics, ranging from cardiopulmonary bypass time to length of stay (LOS) in the ICU and hospital, in 203 patients with type A aortic dissection who had total aortic arch replacement with hypothermic circulatory arrest over an 8-year period ending in August 2014; 121 had b-ACP and 82 had u-ACP. “The issue of u-ACP vs. b-ACP has been examined in aortic arch surgery, but few reports have focused on type A aortic dissection,” Dr. Tong and coauthors wrote.
They acknowledged that some surgeons are reluctant to use b-ACP because of its complexity, but their study found no increase in cross-clamp time, cardiopulmonary bypass time, or surgery time in the b-ACP group. They cited another reason surgeons give for avoiding b-ACP: the risk of embolic injury caused by canulating the left common carotid artery in an atheromatous aorta. “In the present study, this risk was avoided by attaching the left common carotid artery to the four-branched prosthetic graft for left hemisphere perfusion,” Dr. Tong and coauthors wrote.
Key outcomes that the researchers found not statistically significant were:
- Overall 30-day mortality (11.6% for b-ACP vs. 20.7% for u-ACP; P = .075).
- Prevalence of postoperative permanent neurologic dysfunction (8.4% vs. 16.9%; P = .091).
- Average ICU LOS (16 ± 17.75 days vs. 17 ± 11.5 days, P =.454).
- Average hospital LOS (26.5 ± 20.6 days vs. 24.8 ± 10.3 days, P = .434).
However, average ventilation time was lower in the b-ACP group (95.5 hours vs. 147 hours; P less than or equal to.001).
Dr. Tong and coauthors used an aggressive approach, as advocated by Dhaval Trivedi, MD, and colleagues (Ann Thorac Surg. 2016;101:896-903), and had a total arch replacement rate of 57.8%. This rate is higher than most published series in the west but comparable to other studies from China, perhaps because of the relatively young age of this study cohort – an average age of 51 years – compared to data sets other studies have used. Dr. Tong and coauthors used a b-ACP strategy that established both cerebral perfusion routes before circulatory arrest.
Rates of the following complications were also not significantly different across the study population: paraplegia (2.8% for b-ACP vs. 3.1% for u-ACP), temporary neurologic dysfunction (4.7% vs. 9.2%), permanent neurologic dysfunction (8.4% vs. 16.9%), renal failure (18% vs. 23.1%), reoperation for bleeding (2.8% vs. 4.6%), and mediastinal infection (3.7% vs. 6.2%).
While b-ACP patients did not have a statistically significant lower incidence of TND, Dr. Tong and coauthors noted the shorter time on ventilation and significantly lower tracheostomy rates for the b-ACP patients, 3.7% vs. 16.9% for the u-ACP group (P = .003). “In our institute, protocols to wean patients from ventilation were normally initiated as soon as consciousness was regained,” Dr. Tong and coauthors wrote.
Among the study limits Dr. Tong and coauthors acknowledged were its retrospective, nonrandomized, single-center nature, and the fact that the surgeries were performed over an 8-year period representing different eras.
The investigators reported having no relevant financial disclosures.
FROM THE JOURNAL OF THORACIC AND CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY
Key clinical point: Clinical outcomes were comparable between groups who underwent unilateral or bilateral antegrade cerebral perfusion in total arch replacement for type A aortic dissection.
Major finding: Overall 30-day mortality was 11.6% in the bilateral ACP group vs. 20.7% for unilateral ACP (P =.075).
Data source: Population of 203 patients who had aortic arch replacement surgery for type A aortic dissection between September 2006 and August 2014.
Disclosures: Dr. Tong and coauthors reported having no relevant financial disclosures.
Restrictive transfusion strategy safe in cardiac surgery
ANAHEIM, CALIF. – Waiting to transfuse heart surgery patients until their hemoglobin drops below 7.5 g/dL is just as safe as transfusing them when their hemoglobin drops below 9.5 g/dL, and it saves a lot of blood, according to the TRICS III randomized, noninferiority trial of nearly 5,000 patients undergoing cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass.
Cardiac surgeons have been moving to more restrictive transfusion policies following reports of worse postoperative survival when patients are transfused. However, there are concerns about safety and uncertainty over whether it’s the transfusions themselves that are problematic or whether transfused patients do worse because they are sicker to begin with. The Transfusion Requirements in Cardiac Surgery (TRICS) III trial removes some of the doubt: “A restrictive transfusion strategy is as effective and safe as a liberal strategy in patients undergoing cardiac surgery,” said lead investigator C. David Mazer, MD, a professor in the department of anesthesia at the University of Toronto.
Overall, 11.4% in the restrictive-threshold group and 12.5% in the liberal-threshold group met the study’s composite primary outcome of death from any cause, MI, stroke, and new-onset renal failure with dialysis (P less than .001 for noninferiority). There were no statistically significant between-group differences in the individual components of the composite outcome. Mortality was 3% in the restrictive group and 3.6% in the liberal group, a 15% reduction for the restrictive group.
About 52% of the patients in the restrictive arm, compared with 72.6% in the liberal arm, were transfused. When transfused, patients in the restrictive arm received a median of 2 units of red cells; liberal-arm patients received a median of 3 units. The overall cost difference was roughly $3 million, Dr. Mazer said at the American Heart Association scientific sessions.
There were no statistically significant differences in secondary outcomes. Restrictive patients were on mechanical ventilation for a median of 0.38 days and in the ICU for a median of 2.1 days; patients in the liberal arm were ventilated for a median of 0.36 days and in the ICU for a median of 1.9 days. The median hospital stay was 8 days in both groups.
Unexpectedly, patients 75 years and older did better with the restrictive transfusion strategy, with a 30% lower risk of the composite outcome. “Many people think the older you are, the higher your hemoglobin should be, and the more liberal you should be with transfusions. We didn’t find that. [It] challenges current beliefs and may be considered to be hypothesis generating; at a minimum, it highlights that a restrictive transfusion strategy appears to be safe in elderly patients,” Dr. Mazer said.
The participants were a mean of 72 years old, and 35% were women. The majority in both arms underwent coronary artery bypass surgery, valve surgery, or both. Heart transplants were excluded from the study. The trial was conducted in 19 countries, including China and India, but “the results were remarkably consistent independent of where the sites were,” he said.
Results of the TRICS III trial were published simultaneously with Dr. Mazer’s presentation (N Engl J Med. 2017 Nov 12. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1711818).
The trial was funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, among others. Dr. Mazer reported personal fees from Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Octapharma, and Pharmascience, as well as grants and personal fees from Fresenius Kabi.
This is an extremely important study. There have been multiple other trials, and, unfortunately, results have been quite equivocal. It’s incumbent upon us to figure out the best transfusion strategy, especially in cardiac surgery, since it is associated with a large amount of blood utilization. Also, there’ve been projections for a significant lack of blood supply in the future.
While the overall results showed no significant difference in outcomes between the groups, there was a numerical benefit evident in the restrictive group for the composite outcome, as well as all components of the main primary outcome except MI. This is not entirely unexpected, but we are really looking at the short-term effects here. I’m hoping that the longer-term outcomes will be evaluated, because they are extremely important.
Frank Sellke, MD , is chief of cardiothoracic surgery at Brown University in Providence, R.I. He made his comments after the study was presented at the American Heart Association scientific sessions. He was not involved with the work.
This is an extremely important study. There have been multiple other trials, and, unfortunately, results have been quite equivocal. It’s incumbent upon us to figure out the best transfusion strategy, especially in cardiac surgery, since it is associated with a large amount of blood utilization. Also, there’ve been projections for a significant lack of blood supply in the future.
While the overall results showed no significant difference in outcomes between the groups, there was a numerical benefit evident in the restrictive group for the composite outcome, as well as all components of the main primary outcome except MI. This is not entirely unexpected, but we are really looking at the short-term effects here. I’m hoping that the longer-term outcomes will be evaluated, because they are extremely important.
Frank Sellke, MD , is chief of cardiothoracic surgery at Brown University in Providence, R.I. He made his comments after the study was presented at the American Heart Association scientific sessions. He was not involved with the work.
This is an extremely important study. There have been multiple other trials, and, unfortunately, results have been quite equivocal. It’s incumbent upon us to figure out the best transfusion strategy, especially in cardiac surgery, since it is associated with a large amount of blood utilization. Also, there’ve been projections for a significant lack of blood supply in the future.
While the overall results showed no significant difference in outcomes between the groups, there was a numerical benefit evident in the restrictive group for the composite outcome, as well as all components of the main primary outcome except MI. This is not entirely unexpected, but we are really looking at the short-term effects here. I’m hoping that the longer-term outcomes will be evaluated, because they are extremely important.
Frank Sellke, MD , is chief of cardiothoracic surgery at Brown University in Providence, R.I. He made his comments after the study was presented at the American Heart Association scientific sessions. He was not involved with the work.
ANAHEIM, CALIF. – Waiting to transfuse heart surgery patients until their hemoglobin drops below 7.5 g/dL is just as safe as transfusing them when their hemoglobin drops below 9.5 g/dL, and it saves a lot of blood, according to the TRICS III randomized, noninferiority trial of nearly 5,000 patients undergoing cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass.
Cardiac surgeons have been moving to more restrictive transfusion policies following reports of worse postoperative survival when patients are transfused. However, there are concerns about safety and uncertainty over whether it’s the transfusions themselves that are problematic or whether transfused patients do worse because they are sicker to begin with. The Transfusion Requirements in Cardiac Surgery (TRICS) III trial removes some of the doubt: “A restrictive transfusion strategy is as effective and safe as a liberal strategy in patients undergoing cardiac surgery,” said lead investigator C. David Mazer, MD, a professor in the department of anesthesia at the University of Toronto.
Overall, 11.4% in the restrictive-threshold group and 12.5% in the liberal-threshold group met the study’s composite primary outcome of death from any cause, MI, stroke, and new-onset renal failure with dialysis (P less than .001 for noninferiority). There were no statistically significant between-group differences in the individual components of the composite outcome. Mortality was 3% in the restrictive group and 3.6% in the liberal group, a 15% reduction for the restrictive group.
About 52% of the patients in the restrictive arm, compared with 72.6% in the liberal arm, were transfused. When transfused, patients in the restrictive arm received a median of 2 units of red cells; liberal-arm patients received a median of 3 units. The overall cost difference was roughly $3 million, Dr. Mazer said at the American Heart Association scientific sessions.
There were no statistically significant differences in secondary outcomes. Restrictive patients were on mechanical ventilation for a median of 0.38 days and in the ICU for a median of 2.1 days; patients in the liberal arm were ventilated for a median of 0.36 days and in the ICU for a median of 1.9 days. The median hospital stay was 8 days in both groups.
Unexpectedly, patients 75 years and older did better with the restrictive transfusion strategy, with a 30% lower risk of the composite outcome. “Many people think the older you are, the higher your hemoglobin should be, and the more liberal you should be with transfusions. We didn’t find that. [It] challenges current beliefs and may be considered to be hypothesis generating; at a minimum, it highlights that a restrictive transfusion strategy appears to be safe in elderly patients,” Dr. Mazer said.
The participants were a mean of 72 years old, and 35% were women. The majority in both arms underwent coronary artery bypass surgery, valve surgery, or both. Heart transplants were excluded from the study. The trial was conducted in 19 countries, including China and India, but “the results were remarkably consistent independent of where the sites were,” he said.
Results of the TRICS III trial were published simultaneously with Dr. Mazer’s presentation (N Engl J Med. 2017 Nov 12. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1711818).
The trial was funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, among others. Dr. Mazer reported personal fees from Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Octapharma, and Pharmascience, as well as grants and personal fees from Fresenius Kabi.
ANAHEIM, CALIF. – Waiting to transfuse heart surgery patients until their hemoglobin drops below 7.5 g/dL is just as safe as transfusing them when their hemoglobin drops below 9.5 g/dL, and it saves a lot of blood, according to the TRICS III randomized, noninferiority trial of nearly 5,000 patients undergoing cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass.
Cardiac surgeons have been moving to more restrictive transfusion policies following reports of worse postoperative survival when patients are transfused. However, there are concerns about safety and uncertainty over whether it’s the transfusions themselves that are problematic or whether transfused patients do worse because they are sicker to begin with. The Transfusion Requirements in Cardiac Surgery (TRICS) III trial removes some of the doubt: “A restrictive transfusion strategy is as effective and safe as a liberal strategy in patients undergoing cardiac surgery,” said lead investigator C. David Mazer, MD, a professor in the department of anesthesia at the University of Toronto.
Overall, 11.4% in the restrictive-threshold group and 12.5% in the liberal-threshold group met the study’s composite primary outcome of death from any cause, MI, stroke, and new-onset renal failure with dialysis (P less than .001 for noninferiority). There were no statistically significant between-group differences in the individual components of the composite outcome. Mortality was 3% in the restrictive group and 3.6% in the liberal group, a 15% reduction for the restrictive group.
About 52% of the patients in the restrictive arm, compared with 72.6% in the liberal arm, were transfused. When transfused, patients in the restrictive arm received a median of 2 units of red cells; liberal-arm patients received a median of 3 units. The overall cost difference was roughly $3 million, Dr. Mazer said at the American Heart Association scientific sessions.
There were no statistically significant differences in secondary outcomes. Restrictive patients were on mechanical ventilation for a median of 0.38 days and in the ICU for a median of 2.1 days; patients in the liberal arm were ventilated for a median of 0.36 days and in the ICU for a median of 1.9 days. The median hospital stay was 8 days in both groups.
Unexpectedly, patients 75 years and older did better with the restrictive transfusion strategy, with a 30% lower risk of the composite outcome. “Many people think the older you are, the higher your hemoglobin should be, and the more liberal you should be with transfusions. We didn’t find that. [It] challenges current beliefs and may be considered to be hypothesis generating; at a minimum, it highlights that a restrictive transfusion strategy appears to be safe in elderly patients,” Dr. Mazer said.
The participants were a mean of 72 years old, and 35% were women. The majority in both arms underwent coronary artery bypass surgery, valve surgery, or both. Heart transplants were excluded from the study. The trial was conducted in 19 countries, including China and India, but “the results were remarkably consistent independent of where the sites were,” he said.
Results of the TRICS III trial were published simultaneously with Dr. Mazer’s presentation (N Engl J Med. 2017 Nov 12. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1711818).
The trial was funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, among others. Dr. Mazer reported personal fees from Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Octapharma, and Pharmascience, as well as grants and personal fees from Fresenius Kabi.
AT THE AHA SCIENTIFIC SESSIONS
Key clinical point:
Major finding: Overall, 11.4% in the restrictive-threshold group, versus 12.5% in the liberal-threshold group, met the study’s composite primary outcome of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, stroke, or new-onset renal failure with dialysis.
Data source: TRICS III, a randomized, noninferiority trial with almost 5,000 participants
Disclosures: TRICS III was funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, among others. The lead investigator reported personal fees from Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Octapharma, and Pharmascience, as well as grants and personal fees from Fresenius Kabi.
Heart transplantation: Preop LVAD erases adverse impact of pulmonary hypertension
COLORADO SPRINGS – Reconsideration of the role of pulmonary hypertension in heart transplant outcomes is appropriate in the emerging era of the use of left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) as bridge to transplant, according to Ann C. Gaffey, MD, of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
“Pulmonary hypertension secondary to congestive heart failure more than likely can be reversed to the values acceptable for heart transplant by the use of an LVAD. For bridge-to-transplant patients, pretransplant pulmonary hypertension does not affect recipient outcomes post transplantation,” she said at the annual meeting of the Western Thoracic Surgical Association.
Vasodilators are prescribed in an effort to reduce PH; however, 40% of patients with PH are unresponsive to the medications and have therefore been excluded from consideration as potential candidates for a donor heart.
But the growing use of LVADs as a bridge to transplant has changed all that, Dr. Gaffey said. As supporting evidence, she presented a retrospective analysis of the United Network for Organ Sharing database on adult heart transplants from mid-2004 through the end of 2014.
The review turned up 3,951 heart transplant recipients who had been bridged to transplant with an LVAD. Dr. Gaffey and her coinvestigators divided them into three groups: 281 patients without pretransplant PH; 1,454 with moderate PH as defined by 1-3 Wood units; and 592 with severe PH and more than 3 Wood units.
The three groups didn’t differ in terms of age, sex, wait-list time, or the prevalence of diabetes or renal, liver, or cerebrovascular disease. Nor did their donors differ in age, sex, left ventricular function, or allograft ischemic time.
Key in-hospital outcomes were similar between the groups with no, mild, and severe PH.
Moreover, there was no between-group difference in the rate of rejection at 1 year. Five-year survival rates were closely similar in the three groups, in the mid-70s.
Audience member Nahush A. Mokadam, MD, rose to praise Dr. Gaffey’s report.
“This is a great and important study. I think as a group we have been too conservative with pulmonary hypertension, so thank you for shining a good light on it,” said Dr. Mokadam of the University of Washington, Seattle.
Dr. Gaffey reported having no financial conflicts regarding the study, which was conducted free of commercial support.
COLORADO SPRINGS – Reconsideration of the role of pulmonary hypertension in heart transplant outcomes is appropriate in the emerging era of the use of left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) as bridge to transplant, according to Ann C. Gaffey, MD, of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
“Pulmonary hypertension secondary to congestive heart failure more than likely can be reversed to the values acceptable for heart transplant by the use of an LVAD. For bridge-to-transplant patients, pretransplant pulmonary hypertension does not affect recipient outcomes post transplantation,” she said at the annual meeting of the Western Thoracic Surgical Association.
Vasodilators are prescribed in an effort to reduce PH; however, 40% of patients with PH are unresponsive to the medications and have therefore been excluded from consideration as potential candidates for a donor heart.
But the growing use of LVADs as a bridge to transplant has changed all that, Dr. Gaffey said. As supporting evidence, she presented a retrospective analysis of the United Network for Organ Sharing database on adult heart transplants from mid-2004 through the end of 2014.
The review turned up 3,951 heart transplant recipients who had been bridged to transplant with an LVAD. Dr. Gaffey and her coinvestigators divided them into three groups: 281 patients without pretransplant PH; 1,454 with moderate PH as defined by 1-3 Wood units; and 592 with severe PH and more than 3 Wood units.
The three groups didn’t differ in terms of age, sex, wait-list time, or the prevalence of diabetes or renal, liver, or cerebrovascular disease. Nor did their donors differ in age, sex, left ventricular function, or allograft ischemic time.
Key in-hospital outcomes were similar between the groups with no, mild, and severe PH.
Moreover, there was no between-group difference in the rate of rejection at 1 year. Five-year survival rates were closely similar in the three groups, in the mid-70s.
Audience member Nahush A. Mokadam, MD, rose to praise Dr. Gaffey’s report.
“This is a great and important study. I think as a group we have been too conservative with pulmonary hypertension, so thank you for shining a good light on it,” said Dr. Mokadam of the University of Washington, Seattle.
Dr. Gaffey reported having no financial conflicts regarding the study, which was conducted free of commercial support.
COLORADO SPRINGS – Reconsideration of the role of pulmonary hypertension in heart transplant outcomes is appropriate in the emerging era of the use of left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) as bridge to transplant, according to Ann C. Gaffey, MD, of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
“Pulmonary hypertension secondary to congestive heart failure more than likely can be reversed to the values acceptable for heart transplant by the use of an LVAD. For bridge-to-transplant patients, pretransplant pulmonary hypertension does not affect recipient outcomes post transplantation,” she said at the annual meeting of the Western Thoracic Surgical Association.
Vasodilators are prescribed in an effort to reduce PH; however, 40% of patients with PH are unresponsive to the medications and have therefore been excluded from consideration as potential candidates for a donor heart.
But the growing use of LVADs as a bridge to transplant has changed all that, Dr. Gaffey said. As supporting evidence, she presented a retrospective analysis of the United Network for Organ Sharing database on adult heart transplants from mid-2004 through the end of 2014.
The review turned up 3,951 heart transplant recipients who had been bridged to transplant with an LVAD. Dr. Gaffey and her coinvestigators divided them into three groups: 281 patients without pretransplant PH; 1,454 with moderate PH as defined by 1-3 Wood units; and 592 with severe PH and more than 3 Wood units.
The three groups didn’t differ in terms of age, sex, wait-list time, or the prevalence of diabetes or renal, liver, or cerebrovascular disease. Nor did their donors differ in age, sex, left ventricular function, or allograft ischemic time.
Key in-hospital outcomes were similar between the groups with no, mild, and severe PH.
Moreover, there was no between-group difference in the rate of rejection at 1 year. Five-year survival rates were closely similar in the three groups, in the mid-70s.
Audience member Nahush A. Mokadam, MD, rose to praise Dr. Gaffey’s report.
“This is a great and important study. I think as a group we have been too conservative with pulmonary hypertension, so thank you for shining a good light on it,” said Dr. Mokadam of the University of Washington, Seattle.
Dr. Gaffey reported having no financial conflicts regarding the study, which was conducted free of commercial support.
AT THE WTSA ANNUAL MEETING
Key clinical point:
Major finding: It’s time to reconsider the practice of excluding patients with pulmonary hypertension from consideration for a donor heart.
Data source: A retrospective analysis of the United Network for Organ Sharing database including outcomes out to 5 years on 3,951 heart transplant recipients who had been bridged to transplant with an LVAD, most of whom had moderate or severe pulmonary hypertension before transplant.
Disclosures: This study was conducted free of commercial support. The presenter reported having no relevant financial conflicts of interest.