Abstract


Since its introduction in 1995, minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (MIMVS) has been shown to be a valid alternative to conventional sternotomy and several studies have reported excellent clinical outcomes. While MIMVS is now a commonly performed procedure, it is still difficult to standardize. We proprose here a "road to safer surgery", and offer some tips and tricks that could be useful in its learning and performance, and may help surgeons minimize the risk of major complications. With the introduction of 3D vision with a 3D videothoracoscope for 4K stereoscopic acquisition, a medical LCD ultra-HD monitor and active 3D glasses, it is possible to obtain a very realistic view of the surgical field and the mitral valve anatomy, while significantly reducing the learning curve. We describe the procedure step-by-step, with details from the pre-operative phase to the end of the operation. The procedure is structured in consecutive stages: patient induction and positioning, thoracoscopic access and port placement, surgical field exposure, and operative technique.

Abstract


Since the last decade, transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has become the treatment of choice in patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis (AS) who are ineligible or at higher risk for surgery. Due to the high safety profile of current device generation, TAVI has emerged as a qualified alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients with classic aortic stenosis and intermediate surgical risk, severe bicuspid aortic valve stenosis, and isolated pure aortic regurgitation. Moderate aortic stenosis, with and without concomitant heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, are under investigation in randomized controlled clinical trials from which we will gain exciting insights on the best timing of TAVI to protect the left ventricle from further functional deterioration due to increasing AS. In these cases, a meticulous diagnostic approach including advanced imaging is becoming more and more important. Current evidence on antithrombotic strategies after TAVI is weak, contributing to poor levels of standardization and high variability in daily clinical practice. This review will provide a short overview of recent clinical trials including best timing for TAVI with moderate AS and antithrombotic strategies after TAVI with current and future TAVI generations.

Abstract


Objective: To describe our experience with the Gore® C-TAG® endograft with ACTIVE CONTROL System (ACS) (W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc., Flagstaff, AZ, USA) in thoracic aortic repair, focusing on deployment accuracy and aortic wall apposition.
Methods: All patients who underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) using the Gore® C-TAG® endograft with ACS from September 2017 to September 2021 were enrolled in a dedicated database and retrospectively analysed. We collected anatomic data on aortic arch angulation and tortuosity, proximal and distal landing zones, and the target for deployment accuracy. Proximal and distal deployment accuracies (PDA and DDA) were measured through intraoperative digital subtraction angiography (DSA), and postoperative computed tomography angiography (CTA) was required to define endograft apposition to the aortic wall.
Results: Twenty-eight patients who underwent TEVAR with the Gore® C-TAG® with ACS at our institution were selected for this study: 46% presented with a type 3 aortic arch and a proximal landing zone < 3 was used in 53% of cases. Mean PDA and DDA were 1.89 ± 3.5 mm and 0.6 ± 1.4 mm, and were obtained in 93% and 100% of procedures, respectively. Mean proximal and distal wall apposition were 91 ± 17% and 98 ± 5.9%. Fifteen patients required an associated planned procedure, either to revascularize supra-aortic vessels when PLZ was < 3 or to assure optimal distal fixation with EndoAnchors™ (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN, USA) delivery in selected cases. Two patients required reintervention during the same hospitalisation because of type 1a endoleak onset. No further reinterventions were needed during follow-up.
Conclusions: Our single-centre analysis found promising results using the Gore® C-TAG® with ACS, with an optimal accuracy in deployment and wall apposition at both proximal and distal landing zones.

Abstract


Introduction: Complex pathologies involving the aortic arch can be treated using the frozen elephant trunk (FET) technique, which is versatile and continues to be improved with different innovations to further reduce, for example, circulatory arrest time and the need for hypothermia. FET may or may not be a definitive repair, however. Distal extension or completion—especially endovascular—is common but not well described in the literature. This review describes the considerations that are necessary during FET planning and preparation, how pathology specifics and sizing decisions will affect the subsequent need for treatment, and how outcomes might be better reported to improve understanding of the advantages and limitations of the technique.
Materials and Methods: This literature review was performed to identify reports of second-stage endovascular completion after FET repair, and included any literature that described such interventions after index FET, for any aortic arch pathology.
Results: Secondary intervention after FET is an important parameter to establish the success or failure of the index procedure. However, unplanned extensions are often reported with insufficient detail and follow up, and studies rarely differentiate between unplanned or adjunctive procedures. In addition, prediction of the need for extension is complicated by the response of the pathology to the index procedure.
Conclusion: FET is a versatile, established surgical technique that allows for several applications in different pathologies and innovative adaptations. How, when, and why FET is extended needs to be reported in greater detail, with specific consideration given to the interaction of FET and endovascular devices in sizing, integrity, and possible complications.

Abstract


Background: Interwoven nitinol stents (INS) and drug-eluting stents (DES) were designed to improve the mid- and long-term results of femoropopliteal (F-P) angioplasty. The aim of this study was to systematically compare these stents.
Methods: Between 2015 and 2017, 62 patients with symptomatic peripheral artery disease of the F-P segment treated by INS or DES were identified from a prospectively maintained institutional database. The primary outcome measure was one-year primary patency; secondary outcomes were in-stent restenosis (ISR), stent occlusion, target lesion revascularization (TLR) and mortality.
Results: The mean follow-up was 26.9 ± 11.2 months. No statistically significant difference in primary patency at one year was observed (88.6% vs. 88.9%). Throughout follow-up, overall rates of ISR (5.7% vs. 11.1%, p = 0.645), stent occlusion (25.7% vs. 7.4%, p = 0.094) and TLR (25.7% vs. 18.5%, p = 0.505) were statistically equivalent between the groups. Mortality reached 14.3% in the INS group and 3.7% in the DES group, but this difference was not statistically significant (p=0.196). Multivariable analysis revealed significant correlations between ISR and stent occlusions; popliteal lesion localization (p = 0.016) and poor below the knee vessel outflow (p < 0.001).
Conclusion: In the short- and mid-term, the use of an INS or DES in the F-P arterial segment did not result in a difference in primary patency rate, stent occlusion, restenosis, re-intervention or mortality. The overall data do not provide any evidence to favor one stent over the other.