VAs within 30 days after CFLVAD implantation are associated with an increased risk for death. Predictors of early VAs include prior cardiac surgery and pre-CFLVAD ventricular tachycardia storm. Temporal trends have shown a decrease in VA from 2000 to 2015. Strategies to reduce arrhythmia burden shortly after CFLVAD implantation warrant further investigation.

Purpose of Review Heart centers for women (HCW) were developed due to the rising cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in women in the United States in the early 1990s. Our review encompasses the epidemiology, risk factors, diagnostic strategies, treatments, and the role of HCW in managing women with ischemic heart disease (IHD). Recent Findings HCW use a multidisciplinary team to manage women with IHD. Due to the paucity of randomized controlled trials investigating various manifestations of IHD, some treatments are not evidence-based such as those for coronary microvascular dysfunction and spontaneous coronary artery dissection. Sex-specific risk factors have been identified and multimodality cardiac imaging is improving in diagnosing IHD in women. Treatments are being studied to help improve symptoms and outcomes in women with IHD. Summary There has been progress in the care of women with IHD. HCW can be instrumental in treating women with IHD, doing research, and being a source of research study participants.

Background: Valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve replacement (ViV-TAVR) has emerged as a safe, effective alternative to redo aortic valve surgery in high-risk patients with degenerated surgical bioprosthetic valves. However, ViV-TAVR has been associated high postprocedural valvular gradients, compared with TAVR for native-valve aortic stenosis.Methods: We performed a retrospective study of all patients who underwent ViV-TAVR for a degenerated aortic valve bioprosthesis between January 1, 2013 and March 31, 2019 at our center. The primary outcome was postprocedural mean aortic valve gradient. Outcomes were compared across surgical valve type (stented versus stentless), surgical valve internal diameter (≤19 versus >19 mm), and transcatheter aortic valve type (self-expanding vs. balloon-expandable).Results: Overall, 89 patients underwent ViV-TAVR. Mean age was 69.0±12.6 years, 61% were male, and median Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality score was 5.4 [interquartile range, 3.2-8.5].Bioprosthesis mode of failure was stenotic (58% of patients), regurgitant (24%), or mixed (18%). The surgical valve was stented in 75% of patients and stentless in 25%. The surgical valve's internal diameter was ≤19 mm in 45% of cases. A balloon-expandable transcatheter valve was used in 53% of procedures. Baseline aortic valve area and mean gradients were 0.87±0.31 cm 2 and 36±18 mmHg, respectively. These improved after ViV-TAVR to 1.38±0.55 cm 2 and 18±11 mmHg at a median outpatient follow-up of 331 days.Higher postprocedural mean gradients were associated with surgical valves having an internal diameter ≤19 mm (24±13 versus 16±8, P=0.002) and with stented surgical valves (22±11 versus 12±6, P<0.001). Conclusions: ViV-TAVR is an effective option for treating degenerated surgical aortic bioprostheses, with acceptable hemodynamic outcomes. Small surgical valves and stented surgical valves are associated with higher postprocedural gradients.