TAVI for treating severe aortic valve disease in cardiogenic shock: a single centre experience

Abstract Introduction Recent evidence shows the safety and efficacy of TAVI in patients with aortic valve disease (AVD) presenting in cardiogenic shock (CS). However, there is limited data regarding CS management in the cardiac intensive care unit (CICU) and its outcomes. We aimed to describe the CS features, pre-TAVI management and short-term clinical outcomes of a cohort of CS patients (pts) submitted to TAVI. Methods Single-centre retrospective registry of consecutive pts with AVD undergoing TAVI in CS, from January 2020 to October 2023. CS was defined as pre-procedural hypotension/hypoperfusion requiring vasoactive drugs or mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices. The severity of CS was defined according to the SCAI classification. Procedural related outcomes according to the VARC-3 criteria and 30-day mortality were assessed. Results A total of 16 pts (1% of our global TAVI cohort, 62% male, mean age 79±5 years) meet the inclusion criteria. The majority (n=13) presented severe aortic stenosis, two had degenerated aortic bioprosthesis with severe regurgitation and one had native valve severe regurgitation. 6 pts (38%) had isolated left ventricle (LV) dysfunction and 10 (62%) had biventricular dysfunction. The admission LVEF was 33±8% and the mean transaortic gradient for those with aortic stenosis was 46±13mmHg. The EuroSCORE II estimated for a single non-CABG emergency procedure was 37±15%. All patients were refused for surgical treatment upon Heart Team discussion. At admission, 12 (75%) patients presented in CS SCAI-C, 1 (6%) in SCAI-D and 3 (19%) in SCAI-E. These last 3 patients presented in cardiac arrest upon admission to the CICU (time to ROSC from 2 to 15 minutes). The peak lactate level at 48 hours was 3.4 mmol/L [2.1-5.1] and the highest Vasoactive-Inotropic Score (VIS) during admission was 21 [11-45]. None of the patients needed MCS pre-TAVI. 5 (31%) patients required invasive mechanical ventilation and 5 (31%) renal replacement therapy. Median time between CICU admission and transfemoral TAVI was 2.5 days [IQR 1-7]. Procedural success was 100%, with 57% receiving a balloon-expandable and 43% a self-expandable valve. Post-TAVI CICU length of stay was 6 days [IQR 5-9]. Most common procedural complication were the need for permanent pacemaker implantation (n=2, 12%) and access-related bleeding (n=2, 12%). Hospital length-of-stay was 20±15 days. Thirty-day mortality was 12% (n=2). Conclusion In this cohort of CS patients selected for TAVI treatment, procedural success was achieved in all cases. While complications were similar to the general TAVI population, in-hospital mortality remained high but very acceptable. These results suggest that, if correctly selected, aortic valve disease patients in CS represent a niche for whom brief stabilization and urgent percutaneous valve treatment might impact their dismal prognosis.