Background: Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (MIMVS) has been increasingly adopted worldwide as an alternative to conventional sternotomy, especially for young patients. The remarkable results gained by MIMVS have encouraged its application in more complex and fragile patients, such as the elderly, though results in this subgroup remain controversial. It is the aim of this study to assess the postoperative outcomes of patients older than 75 years old undergoing MIMVS, and to compare these results to those of younger patients. Methods: The data of all patients undergoing MIMVS between 2015 and 2022 were retrospectively collected at seven high-volume cardiac surgery centers. Patients were divided into two age-based groups: the young (75 years old). A propensity score (PS) matching analysis obtained two comparable groups. Postoperative outcomes were assessed in both the unmatched and PS-matched populations. Results: Out of 1113 patients undergoing MIMVS, 524 were young and 279 were elderly. Elderly patients were more commonly affected by multiple comorbidities, with a higher EuroSCORE II (4.6 ± 5.5% vs. 1.6 ± 3.3%, p < 0.001). There was no difference in postoperative mortality, though the elderly had a greater incidence of postoperative complications, such as re-exploration for bleeding, stroke, reintubation, and a need for hemodialysis and blood transfusions. After PS matching, 119 pairs of young and elderly patients with similar risk profiles (EuroSCORE II 2.5 ± 4.7% vs. 2.7 ± 3.2%, p = 0.7) were compared, and no differences in all postoperative outcomes were found. Conclusions: Adequately selected elderly patients can report hospital outcomes similar to young patients after MIMVS.

VAD infections: the lead, the graft and the pump

Aims: this study sought to compare midterm outcomes of low-risk patients who underwent surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) vs balloon expandable (BE) or self-expandable (SE) TAVI. Methods: data of consecutive patients undergoing SAVR or transfemoral TAVI between 2017 and 2022 were collected. Patients were separated in 3 groups according to the type of prosthesis: biological surgical prosthesis, BE prosthesis and SE prosthesis. The 3 groups were compared in terms of baseline characteristics, post-procedural outcomes and long-term survival. Results: 542 patients were enrolled. 221 received a surgical prothesis, 150 received a BE prosthesis and 171 a SE prosthesis. TAVI patients were older and with a higher risk profile compared to surgical patients. Propensity score matching resulted in an excellent matching of nearly 80 patients in each group. In the matched cohort, SE prostheses were associated with a significantly higher incidence of stroke (SE group 6.3%, BE group 0, SAVR group 2.3%, p=0.045), para-valvular leak (SE group 8.1%, BE group 2.4%, SAVR group 0, p=0.017) and left bundle branch block (SE group 23.8%, BE group 18.2%, SAVR group 0 %, p< 0.001). Regarding 5-year mortality no significant differences were reported between BE and SE TAVI (13.6% vs22.5%, p=0.066). However, when comparing surgery versus TAVI, SE prosthesis showed a significantly higher 5-year mortality (22.5% vs 11.6%, p=0.042). Instead, BE prosthesis demonstrated their non inferiority compared to surgical prosthesis (13.6% vs 11.6%, p=0.249). Conclusion: BE prosthesis should be considered the prosthesis of choice for patients with long life-expectancy requiring a transcatheter procedure.

Objectives: This study sought to compare midterm outcomes of low-risk patients who underwent a surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) vs. balloon-expandable (BE) or self-expandable (SE) transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Methods: Data on consecutive patients undergoing SAVR or transfemoral TAVI between 2017 and 2022 were collected. Patients were separated into three groups according to the type of prosthesis: a biological surgical prosthesis, BE prosthesis and SE prosthesis. The three groups were compared in terms of baseline characteristics, post-procedural outcomes and long-term survival. Results: A total of 542 patients were enrolled, and 221 received a surgical prothesis, 150 received a BE prosthesis and 171 received an SE prosthesis. TAVI patients were older and had a higher risk profile compared to surgical patients. Propensity score matching resulted in an excellent matching of nearly 80 patients in each group. In the matched cohort, SE prostheses were associated with a significantly higher incidence of stroke (SE group 6.3%, BE group 0, SAVR group 2.3%, p = 0.045), para-valvular leak (SE group 8.1%, BE group 2.4%, SAVR group 0, p = 0.017) and left bundle branch block (SE group 23.8%, BE group 18.2%, SAVR group 0%, p < 0.001). Regarding 5-year mortality, no significant differences were reported between the BE and SE TAVI (13.6% vs. 22.5%, p = 0.066). However, when comparing surgery versus TAVI, the SE prosthesis showed a significantly higher 5-year mortality (22.5% vs. 11.6%, p = 0.042). Instead, the BE prosthesis demonstrated its non-inferiority compared to the surgical prosthesis (13.6% vs. 11.6%, p = 0.249). Conclusions: The BE prosthesis should be considered the prosthesis of choice for patients with a long life expectancy requiring a transcatheter procedure.