Background: Non-technical skills (NTS) are essential for safe surgical practice as they impact workflow and patient outcomes. Observational tools to measure operating room (OR) teams’ NTS have been introduced. However, there are none that account for the specific teamwork challenges introduced by robotic-assisted surgery (RAS). We set out to develop and content-validate a tool to assess multidisciplinary NTS in RAS. Methodology: Stepwise, multi-method procedure. Observations in different surgical departments and a scoping literature review were first used to compile a set of RAS-specific teamwork behaviours. This list was refined and expert validated using a Delphi consensus approach consisting of qualitative interviews and a quantitative survey. Then, RAS-specific behaviours were merged with a well-established assessment tool on OR teamwork (NOTECHS II). Finally, the new tool—RAS-NOTECHS—was applied in standardized observations of real-world procedures to test its reliability (inter-rater agreement via intra-class correlations). Results: Our scoping review revealed 5242 articles, of which 21 were included based on pre-established inclusion criteria. We elicited 16 RAS-specific behaviours from the literature base. These were synthesized with further 18 behavioural markers (obtained from 12 OR-observations) into a list of 26 behavioural markers. This list was reviewed by seven RAS experts and condensed to 15 expert-validated RAS-specific behavioural markers which were then merged into NOTECHS II. For five observations of urologic RAS procedures (duration: 13 h and 41 min), inter-rater agreement for identification of behavioural markers was strong. Agreement of RAS-NOTECHS scores indicated moderate to strong agreement. Conclusions: RAS-NOTECHS is the first observational tool for multidisciplinary NTS in RAS. In preliminary application, it has been shown to be reliable. Since RAS is rapidly increasing and challenges for effective and safe teamwork remain at the forefront of quality and safety of surgical care, RAS-NOTECHS may contribute to training and improvement efforts in technology-facilitated surgeries.

Background: Infective endocarditis (IE) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a severe complication. Surgical explantation of infected transcatheter heart valves (THV) is technically demanding and associated with high mortality. Data on risk factors for perioperative death and long-term outcomes remain limited. Aim: To identify predictors of mortality in patients undergoing surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for IE after TAVR. Methods: We conducted a case–control study of patients treated with SAVR for IE after TAVR at our center between February 2008 and December 2023. Fifteen patients who died in hospital (cases) were compared with 35 perioperative survivors (controls). Hospital survivors were followed for long-term outcomes. Results: Age, sex, comorbidities (kidney disease, cerebrovascular disease, COPD, diabetes, peripheral artery disease), and anthropometrics were similar between groups. Cases had significantly lower left ventricular function and higher logistic EuroSCORE and STS-PROM before surgery. Causative microorganisms, cross-clamp time, and concomitant procedures did not differ. Postoperative pacemaker implantation, rethoracotomy, stroke, and ICU or hospital stay were comparable, while dialysis was more frequent in cases (44% vs. 25.7%). Median follow-up was 294 days (range 1–3802). Survival was 79.8% at 30 days and 67.4% at 1 year. Of 35 hospital survivors, 29 were discharged home, 6 to rehabilitation/other hospitals; 31 remain alive (1 early, 3 late deaths). Conclusions: SAVR for IE after TAVR carries high early mortality (18.1% at 30 days; 32.6% at 1 year). Higher preoperative risk scores and postoperative dialysis were associated with perioperative death. Long-term survival among hospital survivors is favorable, with most patients regaining independent living.

Background/Objectives: In the presence of porcelain aorta (PA), transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has become a class I therapeutic indication for the treatment of severe aortic valve stenosis. To date, few studies have analyzed the clinical outcomes of TAVR in PA patients. We aim to analyze the calcification patterns of the thoracic aorta in PA patients and to evaluate their clinical implications for TAVR procedures. Methods: This study included 161 patients who had PA confirmed through pre-operative CT and underwent TAVR between 11/2014 and 12/2022. The primary outcome was to perform a multi-slice CT (MSCT) analysis assessing the calcification in the proximal, middle, and distal thoracic aortic segments. Each segment was divided into quadrants for scoring calcifications on a scale from 1 (75%). The cohort was categorized into circular or noncircular calcification group. The secondary clinical outcomes were defined according to VARC-3 criteria. Results: The study cohort included 161 patients (median age, 77.2 years; IQR, 70.1–82.6 years). The median EuroSCORE II and STS predicted risk of mortality were 3.10% [1.80–5.58] and 2.70% [1.70–4.30], respectively. In 75% of patients (n = 121/161), TAVR was performed via transfemoral access. Circular calcifications were found in 8.1% of patients, while noncircular calcifications were present in 91.9%. Significant calcifications were primarily in the right quadrant of the proximal segment (33.54%), superior quadrant of the middle segment (39.75%), and left quadrant of the distal segment (73.29%). The 30-day mortality rate was 3.11% and periprocedural ischemic stroke rate 3.38%. Conclusions: Most TAVR patients with PA exhibited noncircular calcification. The most extensive calcifications were primarily in areas relevant to surgical manipulation. Patients with PA displayed low short-term mortality and relatively few stroke events. In view of these findings, TAVR constitutes a valid treatment option for patients with PA and aortic stenosis.

Background: The study aims to compare the short-term clinical outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with the novel self-expandable, intra-annular Navitor valve (NAV) and the balloon-expandable, intra-annular Sapien 3 Ultra valve (S3U). Methods: From a single-center TAVI database, patients receiving NAV and S3U were identified. We applied 1:2 propensity score matching for the selected variables (gender, age, aortic valve perimeter, area, diameter, mean aortic valve gradient, EuroScore2, coronary artery disease (CAD), previous stroke and previous pacemaker implantation), resulting in 153 patients. Results: Clinical outcomes at 30 days of 51 patients with NAV [mean age: 80.4 ± 6.7 years; 51% female; mean annulus diameter: 24.1 ± 1.40 mm; EuroScore2: 3.4 ± 3.1%] and 102 patients with S3U [mean age: 79.9 ± 6.5 years (p = 0.7); 51% female (p > 0.99); mean annulus diameter: 24.1 ± 1.4 mm (p > 0.99); EuroScore2: 3.2 ± 2.7 (p = 0.7)] were analyzed according to VARC-3 recommendations. Post-TAVI aortic valve mean (S3U: 11.0 [3–27] mmHg; NAV: 7 [3–15] mmHg; p < 0.001) and maximum (S3U: 22 [6–44] mmHg; NAV: 12 [5–28] mmHg; p < 0.001) gradients at discharge were significantly lower with NAV, whereas the effective orifice area (EOA) of the aortic valve measured significantly larger with NAV (S3U: 1.5 [0.8–3.8] cm²; NAV: 2.1 [0.9–3.5] cm²; p < 0.001). Rates of no to mild paravalvular regurgitation (PVL) were 92.1% after NAV and 91.2% after S3U implantation (p = 0.15), mild to moderate PVL were 2.0% after NAV vs. 2.9% after S3U (p = 0.1) and moderate PVL were 2% after NAV and 1% after S3U (p = 0.07). None of the patients had a severe regurgitation. Severe patient–prosthesis mismatch (PPM) occurred significantly less with NAV (S3U: 14.7%; NAV: 7.8%; p = 0.002). One (1%) non-disabling stroke occurred within the S3U group and none occurred within the NAV group (p = 0.1). Life-threatening (S3U: 2.9%; NAV= 1%; p > 0.99) and major (S3U: n = 2.9; NAV: 0%; p = 0.55) bleeding events were comparable between both groups. The incidence of major (S3U: 2.9%; NAV: 2.0%; p > 0.99) vascular complications and the need for permanent pacemaker implantation (S3U: 9.8%; NAV: 11.8%; p = 0.8) were comparable in both groups. The 30-day mortality rate was 0.7% [1 in NAV group (2%), none in S3U; p = 0.3]. Conclusions: In conclusion, at 30-day follow-up, the self-expanding intra-annular Navitor valve demonstrated excellent acute safety and superior early hemodynamic performance, characterized by significantly lower transvalvular gradients and lower rates of severe PPM compared to the balloon-expandable Sapien 3 Ultra. However, whether these acute hemodynamic advantages translate into superior long-term clinical outcomes remains to be determined in long-term follow-up studies.