Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are used for many conditions where anticoagulation is needed such as non-valvular atrial fibrillation, deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE). These novel agents have become popular since they do not require monitoring of therapeutic levels and there is a lower risk of certain bleeding complications when compared to warfarin. However, the efficacy and side effect profile of these agents have not been widely studied in certain patient cohorts, namely cancer patients and patients on immunomodulators or hormone analogs. We present a case of a patient with a history of malignancy and autoimmune disease who developed pericardial and pleural effusions shortly after initiating apixaban for treatment of a PE. In addition, we aim to increase awareness of the role that the newly available reversal agents for anticoagulants would offer in the acute management of hemorrhagic pericardial and pleural effusions caused by DOACs in patients with and without malignancy.

Background: Traditional open sternotomy coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) utilizes highly invasive techniques that lead to several serious complications. In response, minimally invasive cardiac surgery CABG (MICS-CABG) was developed. MICS-CABG is safe, reproducible, and with fewer complications, while allowing for better postoperative recovery periods. There is a paucity of data exploring rates of repeat revascularization in patients post MICS-CABG compared to post traditional sternotomy CABG. Methods: This was a retrospective billing database review examining 1468 CABG patients at a large university medical center from January 2005 to December 2017. The primary objective was to compare the rate of repeat revascularization events between MICS-CABG and traditional open sternotomy CABG over an eight-year follow-up period. Results: Our study population consisted of 1468 patients, of whom 513 had MICS-CABG and 955 had traditional CABG. The number of patients undergoing repeat revascularization within the eight-year surveillance was 99 for MICS-CABG and 75 for traditional CABG. The Kaplan-Meier survival probability estimates for eight years were 0.86 for MICS-CABG and 0.91 for traditional CABG. The mean time until a repeat revascularization event was 84.1 months for MICS-CABG and 88.5 months for traditional CABG. Conclusions: Traditional CABG was found to have a statistically significantly longer time to repeat revascularization than MICS-CABG. Despite the technical challenges associated with MICS-CABG, the time to repeat revascularization was different by only about four months, which may not hold large clinical significance. This suggests that MICS-CABG may have a role to play due to previous findings showing a reduction in complications while allowing for better postoperative recovery periods.

Sutureless bioprosthetic valves such as the Sorin Perceval S valve (SPV) have been used in patients with aortic stenosis that require surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). These prostheses have been marketed on the basis of their rapid implantation techniques with avoidance of sutures and reduced aortic cross-clamp times. We report a case of an early failure of a SPV nearly 4 years after implantation in a 58-year-old woman who was low-risk. While the patient’s symptoms initially improved with SAVR with a sutureless bioprosthetic valve, they progressively worsened as the valve degraded, and the leaflets became increasingly calcified and stenotic ultimately, requiring reoperative SAVR with a St. Jude mechanical valve. This case raises the issue of the lack of much-needed data describing the long-term durability and hemodynamic performance of these valves, particularly in a low-risk patient with excellent functional status. We hope to shed further insight into the lack of long-term studies on patients with SPV to assess their longevity and long-term effectiveness, as well as elucidation of possible prevention and monitoring of these potential complications. The use of newer generation prostheses, although attractive for their ease of implantation, potentially carries higher long-term risk due to shorter durability leading to reintervention to address valve deterioration. This is especially true in low-risk patients who are young and active. Cardiology and cardiothoracic surgery societies need to develop a universal registry with follow-up of all valves in order to track and study the durability of these valves, and to evaluate for incidence of known and potential complications. Cardiol Res. 2020;11(2):113-117 doi: https://doi.org/10.14740/cr1013

Treatment of congestive heart failure (CHF) with left ventricular (LV) systolic dysfunction and severe aortic stenosis (AS) is challenging, yet transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has emerged as a suitable treatment option in such patients. We compared the periprocedural outcomes of TAVR in patients with an ejection fraction (EF) of ≤20% (VLEF group) to patients with an EF > 20% to ≤40% (LEF group). We included patients with severe AS and reduced LV ejection fraction (LVEF ≤ 40%) who underwent TAVR at four centers within Northwell Health between January 2016 and December 2020. Over 2000 consecutive patients were analyzed, of which 355 patients met the inclusion criteria. The primary composite endpoint was in-hospital mortality, moderate or greater paravalvular (PVL), stroke, conversion to open surgery, aortic valve re-intervention, and/or need for PPM. Secondary endpoints were length of stay, NYHA classification at 1 month and 1 year, mortality at 1 month and 1 year, mean valve gradient at 1 month, KCCQ score at 1 month, and ≥ moderate PVL at 1 month. There was no difference in the primary composite endpoint between the two groups (23.6% for VLEF vs. 25.3% for LEF, p = 0.29). During TAVR placement, 40% of patients in the VLEF group required ≥1 vasopressors for hypotension lasting ≥30 min vs. only 21% of patients in the LEF group (p < 0.01). Intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) use during procedure was greater in the VLEF group (9% vs. 1%, p < 0.01)—all placed post TAVR. Emergency ECMO use was higher in the VLEF group as well (5% vs. 0%). Total length of stay was significantly different between the two groups as well (6 days vs. 3 days, p < 0.01). Both groups had a change in LVEF of ~10%. One-year outcomes were similar between the groups. All-cause mortality at 1 year was not significantly different at 1 year (13% for VLEF vs. 11% for LEF), and KCC scores were also similar (77.54 vs. 74.97). Mean aortic valve gradients were also similar (12 mmHg vs. 11 mmHg, p = 0.48). Our study suggests that patients with EF ≤ 20% can safely have TAVR with similar periprocedural outcomes compared to patients with EF > 20% to ≤40% despite higher rates of vasopressor and mechanical support.

We report herein the case of an elderly female who presented with myocardial infarction complicated by ventricular septal defect (VSD) that was evident on cardiac auscultation and contrast echocardiography using Lumason® (Bracco Diagnostics Inc, Monroe Township, USA). Patient underwent surgical repair for her VSD post-infarct along with coronary artery bypass grafting after being treated for cardiogenic shock. We also highlight the management strategies in patients with similar complications. In this report, we shed the light on the importance of using Lumason contrast for the identification of shunt and for the diagnosis of VSD. Lumason contrast is widely available and licensed.