Sanjeevan Pasupati

Bio: Sanjeevan Pasupati is an academic researcher from University of British Columbia. The author has contributed to research in topics: Aortic valve & Aortic valve replacement. The author has an hindex of 12, co-authored 22 publications receiving 4193 citations. Previous affiliations of Sanjeevan Pasupati include St. Paul's Hospital.

Percutaneous transarterial aortic valve replacement in selected high-risk patients with aortic stenosis.

Abstract: Background— Percutaneous aortic valve replacement represents an endovascular alternative to conventional open heart surgery without the need for sternotomy, aortotomy, or cardiopulmonary bypass. Methods and Results— Transcatheter implantation of a balloon-expandable stent valve using a femoral arterial approach was attempted in 50 symptomatic patients with severe aortic stenosis in whom there was a consensus that the risks of conventional open heart surgery were very high. Valve implantation was successful in 86% of patients. Intraprocedural mortality was 2%. Discharge home occurred at a median of 5 days (interquartile range, 4 to 13). Mortality at 30 days was 12% in patients in whom the logistic European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation risk score was 28%. With experience, procedural success increased from 76% in the first 25 patients to 96% in the second 25 (P=0.10), and 30-day mortality fell from 16% to 8% (P=0.67). Successful valve replacement was associated with an increase in echocardiog...

Percutaneous Aortic Valve Implantation Retrograde From the Femoral Artery

Abstract: Background— Percutaneous aortic valve implantation by an antegrade transvenous approach has been described but is problematic. Retrograde prosthetic aortic valve implantation via the femoral artery has potential advantages. Percutaneous prosthetic aortic valve implantation via the femoral arterial approach is described and the initial experience reported. Methods and Results— The valve prosthesis is constructed from a stainless steel stent with an attached trileaflet equine pericardial valve and a fabric cuff. After routine aortic balloon valvuloplasty, a 22F or 24F sheath is advanced from the femoral artery to the aorta. A steerable, deflectable catheter facilitates manipulation of the prosthesis around the aortic arch and through the stenotic valve. Rapid ventricular pacing is used to reduce cardiac output while the delivery balloon is inflated to deploy the prosthesis within the annulus. Percutaneous aortic prosthetic valve implantation was attempted in 18 patients (aged 81±6 years) in whom surgical ri...

Transapical Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Humans Initial Clinical Experience

Abstract: Background— Aortic valve replacement with cardiopulmonary bypass is currently the treatment of choice for symptomatic aortic stenosis but carries a significant risk of morbidity and mortality, particularly in patients with comorbidities. Recently, percutaneous transfemoral aortic valve implantation has been proposed as a viable alternative in selected patients. We describe our experience with a new, minimally invasive, catheter-based approach to aortic valve implantation via left ventricular apical puncture without cardiopulmonary bypass or sternotomy. Methods and Results— A left anterolateral intercostal incision is used to expose the left ventricular apex. Direct needle puncture of the apex allows introduction of a hemostatic sheath into the left ventricle. The valve prosthesis, constructed from a stainless steel stent with an attached trileaflet equine pericardial valve, is crimped onto a valvuloplasty balloon. The prosthetic valve and balloon catheter are passed over a wire into the left ventricle. Po...

Noninvasive Evaluation of the Aortic Root With Multislice Computed Tomography : Implications for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Abstract: Objectives In the present study, the anatomy of the aortic root was assessed noninvasively with multislice computed tomography (MSCT). Background Transcatheter aortic valve replacement has been proposed as an alternative to surgery in high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis. For this procedure, detailed knowledge of aortic annulus diameters and the relation between the annulus and the coronary arteries is needed. Methods In 169 patients (111 men, age 54 ± 11 years), a 64-slice MSCT scan was performed for evaluation of coronary artery disease. Of these, 150 patients had no or mild aortic stenosis, and 19 patients had moderate to severe aortic stenosis. Reconstructed coronal and sagittal views were used for assessment of the aortic annulus diameter in 2 directions. In addition, the distance between the annulus and the ostium of the right and left coronary arteries and the length of the coronary leaflets were assessed. The LV outflow tract and interventricular septum were analyzed on the single oblique sagittal view at end-diastole. Results The diameter of the aortic annulus was 26.3 ± 2.8 mm on the coronal view, and 23.5 ± 2.7 mm on the sagittal view. Mean difference between the 2 diameters was 2.9 ± 1.8 mm, indicating an oval shape of the aortic annulus. Mean distance between the aortic annulus and the ostium of the right coronary artery was 17.2 ± 3.3 mm, and mean distance between the annulus and the ostium of the left coronary artery was 14.4 ± 2.9 mm. In 82 patients (49%), the length of the left coronary leaflet exceeded the distance between the annulus and the ostium of the left coronary artery. There were no significant differences in the diameter of annulus, diameter of sinus of Valsalva, or the distance between the annulus, left coronary leaflet, and the ostium of the left coronary artery, between the patient with and without severe aortic stenosis. Conclusions The MSCT can provide detailed information on the shape of the aortic annulus and the relation between the annulus and the ostia of the coronary arteries. Thereby, MSCT may be helpful for avoiding paravalvular leakage and coronary occlusion and may facilitate the selection of candidates for transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

Role of Echocardiography in Percutaneous Aortic Valve Implantation

Abstract: Objectives This study was designed to investigate the usefulness and limitations of echocardiography in optimizing the outcome of percutaneous aortic valve implantation. Background Percutaneous aortic valve implantation is an emerging technique that has the potential to revolutionize the treatment of aortic valve disease. To date, however, the technique has been limited by technical constraints. Precise positioning of the valve is essential to minimize the potential for paravalvular regurgitation or device migration. Initial experience with device placement utilized fluoroscopic guidance only. Methods Candidates for percutaneous aortic valve implantation were evaluated with transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) to assess aortic annular dimension and aortic valve hemodynamics. Fifty consecutive patients were deemed suitable for percutaneous aortic valve implantation. Seventy-four percent (37 of 50) of patients underwent transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) during the procedure. Results Eighty-six percent (43 of 50) of patients had successful implantation, of which 77% (33 of 43) had TEE. Transthoracic echocardiography was used to determine annular dimension and was useful in guiding correct device sizing. Transesophageal echocardiography was able to successfully guide device implantation in 97% (33 of 34) of patients in whom the native valve was crossed with the percutaneous heart valve. Transesophageal echocardiography was used for the early detection of paravalvular aortic regurgitation (AR) and complemented fluoroscopy in the detection of complications. Additional balloon dilatation of the percutaneous heart valve was performed in 12 patients because of significant paravalvular AR, with 7 showing improvement in AR grade. After the procedure, early outcomes were evaluated using TTE. All patients in whom the device was successfully placed (43 of 50) had improvement in their aortic stenosis. Paravalvular AR, although present in many patients, is usually mild and has not emerged as a significant problem. Conclusions Echocardiography has an important role in case selection, in guiding device placement, and in detecting complications of percutaneous aortic valve implantation.

Recommendations for cardiac chamber quantification by echocardiography in adults: an update from the American Society of Echocardiography and the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging.

Abstract: The rapid technological developments of the past decade and the changes in echocardiographic practice brought about by these developments have resulted in the need for updated recommendations to the previously published guidelines for cardiac chamber quantification, which was the goal of the joint writing group assembled by the American Society of Echocardiography and the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging. This document provides updated normal values for all four cardiac chambers, including three-dimensional echocardiography and myocardial deformation, when possible, on the basis of considerably larger numbers of normal subjects, compiled from multiple databases. In addition, this document attempts to eliminate several minor discrepancies that existed between previously published guidelines.

Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Implantation for Aortic Stenosis in Patients Who Cannot Undergo Surgery

Abstract: Background Many patients with severe aortic stenosis and coexisting conditions are not candi dates for surgical replacement of the aortic valve. Recently, transcatheter aortic-valve implantation (TAVI) has been suggested as a less invasive treatment for high-risk patients with aortic stenosis. Methods We randomly assigned patients with severe aortic stenosis, whom surgeons considered not to be suitable candidates for surgery, to standard therapy (including balloon aortic valvuloplasty) or transfemoral transcatheter implantation of a balloon-expandable bovine pericardial valve. The primary end point was the rate of death from any cause. Results A total of 358 patients with aortic stenosis who were not considered to be suitable candidates for surgery underwent randomization at 21 centers (17 in the United States). At 1 year, the rate of death from any cause (Kaplan–Meier analysis) was 30.7% with TAVI, as compared with 50.7% with standard therapy (hazard ratio with TAVI, 0.55; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.40 to 0.74; P<0.001). The rate of the composite end point of death from any cause or repeat hospitalization was 42.5% with TAVI as com pared with 71.6% with standard therapy (hazard ratio, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.59; P<0.001). Among survivors at 1 year, the rate of cardiac symptoms (New York Heart Association class III or IV) was lower among patients who had undergone TAVI than among those who had received standard therapy (25.2% vs. 58.0%, P<0.001). At 30 days, TAVI, as compared with standard therapy, was associated with a higher incidence of major strokes (5.0% vs. 1.1%, P = 0.06) and major vascular complications (16.2% vs. 1.1%, P<0.001). In the year after TAVI, there was no deterioration in the functioning of the bioprosthetic valve, as assessed by evidence of stenosis or regurgitation on an echocardiogram. Conclusions In patients with severe aortic stenosis who were not suitable candidates for surgery, TAVI, as compared with standard therapy, significantly reduced the rates of death from any cause, the composite end point of death from any cause or repeat hospitalization, and cardiac symptoms, despite the higher incidence of major strokes and major vascular events. (Funded by Edwards Lifesciences; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00530894.)

Transcatheter versus Surgical Aortic-Valve Replacement in High-Risk Patients

Abstract: A b s t r ac t Background The use of transcatheter aortic-valve replacement has been shown to reduce mortality among high-risk patients with aortic stenosis who are not candidates for surgical replacement. However, the two procedures have not been compared in a randomized trial involving high-risk patients who are still candidates for surgical replacement. Methods At 25 centers, we randomly assigned 699 high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis to undergo either transcatheter aortic-valve replacement with a balloon-expandable bovine pericardial valve (either a transfemoral or a transapical approach) or surgical replacement. The primary end point was death from any cause at 1 year. The primary hypothesis was that transcatheter replacement is not inferior to surgical replacement. Results The rates of death from any cause were 3.4% in the transcatheter group and 6.5% in the surgical group at 30 days (P = 0.07) and 24.2% and 26.8%, respectively, at 1 year (P = 0.44), a reduction of 2.6 percentage points in the transcatheter group (upper limit of the 95% confidence interval, 3.0 percentage points; predefined margin, 7.5 percentage points; P = 0.001 for noninferiority). The rates of major stroke were 3.8% in the transcatheter group and 2.1% in the surgical group at 30 days (P = 0.20) and 5.1% and 2.4%, respectively, at 1 year (P = 0.07). At 30 days, major vascular compli- cations were significantly more frequent with transcatheter replacement (11.0% vs. 3.2%, P<0.001); adverse events that were more frequent after surgical replacement included major bleeding (9.3% vs. 19.5%, P<0.001) and new-onset atrial fibrillation (8.6% vs. 16.0%, P = 0.006). More patients undergoing transcatheter replacement had an improvement in symptoms at 30 days, but by 1 year, there was not a significant between-group difference. Conclusions In high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis, transcatheter and surgical proce- dures for aortic-valve replacement were associated with similar rates of survival at 1 year, although there were important differences in periprocedural risks. (Funded by Edwards Lifesciences; Clinical Trials.gov number, NCT00530894.)

Two-Year Outcomes after Transcatheter or Surgical Aortic-Valve Replacement

Abstract: The rates of death from any cause were similar in the TAVR and surgery groups (hazard ratio with TAVR, 0.90; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71 to 1.15; P = 0.41) and at 2 years (Kaplan–Meier analysis) were 33.9% in the TAVR group and 35.0% in the surgery group (P = 0.78). The frequency of all strokes during follow-up did not differ significantly between the two groups (hazard ratio, 1.22; 95% CI, 0.67 to 2.23; P = 0.52). At 30 days, strokes were more frequent with TAVR than with surgical replacement (4.6% vs. 2.4%, P = 0.12); subsequently, there were 8 additional strokes in the TAVR group and 12 in the surgery group. Improvement in valve areas was similar with TAVR and surgical replacement and was maintained for 2 years. Paravalvular regurgitation was more frequent after TAVR (P<0.001), and even mild paravalvular regurgitation was associated with increased late mortality (P<0.001). Conclusions A 2-year follow-up of patients in the PARTNER trial supports TAVR as an alternative to surgery in high-risk patients. The two treatments were similar with respect to mortality, reduction in symptoms, and improved valve hemodynamics, but paravalvular regurgitation was more frequent after TAVR and was associated with increased late mortality. (Funded by Edwards Lifesciences; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00530894.)

Standardized Endpoint Definitions for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Clinical Trials : A Consensus Report From the Valve Academic Research Consortium

Abstract: Objectives To propose standardized consensus definitions for important clinical endpoints in transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), investigations in an effort to improve the quality of clinical research and to enable meaningful comparisons between clinical trials. To make these consensus definitions accessible to all stakeholders in TAVI clinical research through a peer reviewed publication, on behalf of the public health. Background Transcatheter aortic valve implantation may provide a worthwhile less invasive treatment in many patients with severe aortic stenosis and since its introduction to the medical community in 2002, there has been an explosive growth in procedures. The integration of TAVI into daily clinical practice should be guided by academic activities, which requires a harmonized and structured process for data collection, interpretation, and reporting during well-conducted clinical trials.