977 resultados para Transcatheter aortic valve replacement
Resumo:
The perioperative risk for redo surgical aortic valve replacement (S-AVR) in patients with severe aortic stenosis and prior coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is increased. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) represents an alternative. We assessed the perioperative and mid-term clinical outcome of patients undergoing S-AVR or TAVI.
Resumo:
Atrioventricular conduction abnormalities (AVCA) may complicate transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). The aim of this study was to prospectively evaluate AVCA after TAVI and SAVR.
Resumo:
OBJECTIVES To compare health-related quality of life (QoL) in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation via transapical access (TA TAVI) with patients undergoing surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). METHODS One hundred and forty-four high-risk patients referred for aortic valve replacement underwent TAVI screening and were assigned to either TA TAVI (n = 51, age 79.7 ± 9.2 years, logistic EuroSCORE 26.5 ± 16.1%, 51% males) or SAVR (n = 93, age 81.1 ± 5.3 years, logistic EuroSCORE 12.1 ± 9.3%, 42% males) by the interdisciplinary heart team. QoL was assessed using the Short Form 36 (SF-36) Health Survey Questionnaire and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Furthermore, current living conditions and the degree of independence at home were evaluated. RESULTS Patients undergoing TA TAVI were at higher risk as assessed by EuroSCORE (26.5 ± 16 vs. 12.1 ± 9, P < 0.001) and STS score (6.7 ± 4 vs. 4.4 ± 3, P < 0.001) compared with SAVR patients. At the 30-day follow-up, the rate of mortality was similar and amounted to 7.8% for TA TAVI and 7.5% for SAVR patients and raised to 25.5% in TA TAVI and 18.3% in SAVR patients after a follow-up period of 15 ± 10 months. Assessment of QoL revealed no differences in terms of anxiety and depression between TA TAVI and SAVR patients. The SF-36 mental health metascore was similar in both groups (65.6 ± 19 vs. 68.8 ± 22, P = 0.29), while a significant difference was observed in the physical health metascore (49.7 ± 21 vs. 62.0 ± 21, P = 0.015). After adjustment for baseline characteristics, this difference disappeared. However, every added point in the preoperative risk assessment with the STS score decreased the SF-36 physical health dimension by two raw points at the follow-up assessment. CONCLUSIONS Selected high-risk patients undergoing TAVI by using a transapical access achieve similar clinical outcomes and QoL compared with patients undergoing SAVR. Increased STS scores predict worse QoL outcomes.
Resumo:
This study sought to compare all-cause mortality in patients at intermediate surgical risk undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR).
Resumo:
AIMS: It is unclear whether transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) addresses an unmet clinical need for those currently rejected for surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) and whether there is a subgroup of high-risk patients benefiting more from TAVI compared to SAVR. In this two-centre, prospective cohort study, we compared baseline characteristics and 30-day mortality between TAVI and SAVR in consecutive patients undergoing invasive treatment for aortic stenosis. METHODS AND RESULTS: We pre-specified different adjustment methods to examine the effect of TAVI as compared with SAVR on overall 30-day mortality: crude univariable logistic regression analysis, multivariable analysis adjusted for baseline characteristics, analysis adjusted for propensity scores, propensity score matched analysis, and weighted analysis using the inverse probability of treatment (IPT) as weights. A total of 1,122 patients were included in the study: 114 undergoing TAVI and 1,008 patients undergoing SAVR. The crude mortality rate was greater in the TAVI group (9.6% vs. 2.3%) yielding an odds ratio [OR] of 4.57 (95%-CI 2.17-9.65). Compared to patients undergoing SAVR, patients with TAVI were older, more likely to be in NYHA class III and IV, and had a considerably higher logistic EuroSCORE and more comorbid conditions. Adjusted OR depended on the method used to control for confounding and ranged from 0.60 (0.11-3.36) to 7.57 (0.91-63.0). We examined the distribution of propensity scores and found scores to overlap sufficiently only in a narrow range. In patients with sufficient overlap of propensity scores, adjusted OR ranged from 0.35 (0.04-2.72) to 3.17 (0.31 to 31.9). In patients with insufficient overlap, we consistently found increased odds of death associated with TAVI compared with SAVR irrespective of the method used to control confounding, with adjusted OR ranging from 5.88 (0.67-51.8) to 25.7 (0.88-750). Approximately one third of patients undergoing TAVI were found to be potentially eligible for a randomised comparison of TAVI versus SAVR. CONCLUSIONS: Both measured and unmeasured confounding limit the conclusions that can be drawn from observational comparisons of TAVI versus SAVR. Our study indicates that TAVI could be associated with either substantial benefits or harms. Randomised comparisons of TAVI versus SAVR are warranted.
Resumo:
The factors that influence decision making in severe aortic stenosis (AS) are unknown. Our aim was to assess, in patients with severe AS, the determinants of management and prognosis in a multicenter registry that enrolled all consecutive adults with severe AS during a 1-month period. One-year follow-up was obtained in all patients and included vital status and aortic valve intervention (aortic valve replacement [AVR] and transcatheter aortic valve implantation [TAVI]). A total of 726 patients were included, mean age was 77.3 ± 10.6 years, and 377 were women (51.8%). The most common management was conservative therapy in 468 (64.5%) followed by AVR in 199 (27.4%) and TAVI in 59 (8.1%). The strongest association with aortic valve intervention was patient management in a tertiary hospital with cardiac surgery (odds ratio 2.7, 95% confidence interval 1.8 to 4.1, p <0.001). The 2 main reasons to choose conservative management were the absence of significant symptoms (136% to 29.1%) and the presence of co-morbidity (128% to 27.4%). During 1-year follow-up, 132 patients died (18.2%). The main causes of death were heart failure (60% to 45.5%) and noncardiac diseases (46% to 34.9%). One-year survival for patients treated conservatively, with TAVI, and with AVR was 76.3%, 94.9%, and 92.5%, respectively, p <0.001. One-year survival of patients treated conservatively in the absence of significant symptoms was 97.1%. In conclusion, most patients with severe AS are treated conservatively. The outcome in asymptomatic patients managed conservatively was acceptable. Management in tertiary hospitals is associated with valve intervention. One-year survival was similar with both interventional strategies.
Resumo:
Background: Transcatheter aortic valve implantations (TAVI) are indicated in high risk patients requiring aortic valve replacement (AVR). However, CT-scans, coronary angiograms and intraoperative aortographies can induce contrast-related nephro-toxicity with a concrete risk of acute postoperative renal failure, especially in severely diseased patients. To prevent this complication, we routinely perform transapical (TA) TAVI guided by transesophageal echocardiogram and fluoroscopy without angiography. Material and Methods: From November 2008 to December 2009, 31 high-risk patients suffering from severe symptomatic aortic stenosis underwent TA-TAVI in our institution. The preoperative imaging assessment (cardiac CT-scan and coronary angiogram) was performed no less than 10 days before the TA-TAVI in all patients (to recover the renal function) with a low-dose protocol for injected contrast medium (equivalent to the patient's weight for the CT-scan). During the TA-TAVI, the stent-valve positioning was performed without any contrast injection. Results: 32 consecutive stent-valve were successfully positioned in 31 patients (mean age 80.76 8 8.3 years; mean EuroSCORE: 32.2 8 12.9%) through a transapical access (1 patient required 2 valves for valve embolisation). The mean preoperative creatinine and urea blood levels were 102.6 8 67.7 _ g/dl (range 53-339 _ g/dl) and 8.45 8 4.9 mmol/l, respectively. A chronic renal insufficiency affected 12 patients (38.7%) with 1 patient in pre-dialysis. Postoperatively, no patient developed acute myocardial infarction, atrio-ventricular block or acute renal insufficiency (mean creatinine level: 89.7 8 64.55 _ g/dl; urea level: 7.11 8 3.47 mmol/l) and the 30-days mortality was 9.67% (3 patients). Conclusion: Specific preoperative and intraoperative protocols that require lowdoses or absence of contrast medium are useful to preserve the renal function in high risk patients operated for TAVI.
Resumo:
Bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement is the treatment of choice for patients over 65 years of age suffering from aortic valve disease, and for younger patients with contraindications to long-lasting anticoagulation. Despite several technical improvements to reduce the risk of structural valve degeneration (SVD), the risk of SVD still exists, in particular for hemodialysis patients and patients under 60 years of age at surgery. Redo open heart surgery is the treatment of choice in case of valve degeneration, but caries a higher surgical risk when elderly patients with comorbidities are concerned. In the last 5 years, transcatheter aortic "valve-in-valve" procedures represent a valid alternative to standard redo surgery in selected patients. Valve-in-valve procedures represent a less invasive approach in high-risk patients and the published results are very encouraging. Technical success rates of 100% have been reported, as have the absence of paravalvular leaks, acceptable trans-valvular gradients (depending on the size of the original bioprosthesis), and low complication rates. The current article focuses on choosing the correct transcutaneous valve to match the patient's existing bioprosthesis for valve-in-valve procedures.
Resumo:
Objective: To ascertain incidence and predictors of new permanent pacemaker (PPM) following transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with the self-expanding aortic bioprosthesis. Background: TAVI with the Medtronic Corevalve (MCV) Revalving System (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN) has been associated with important post-procedural conduction abnormalities and frequent need for PPM. Methods: Overall, 73 consecutive patients with severe symptomatic AS underwent TAVI with the MCV at two institutions; 10 patients with previous pacemaker and 3 patients with previous aortic valve replacement were excluded for this analysis. Clinical, echocardiographic, and procedural data were collected prospectively in a dedicated database. A standard 12-lead ECG was recorded in all patients at baseline, after the procedure and predischarge. Decision to implant PPM was taken according to current guidelines. Logistic multivariable modeling was applied to identify independent predictors of PPM at discharge. Results: Patients exhibited high-risk features as evidenced by advanced age (mean = 82.1 +/- 6.2 years) and high surgical scores (logistic EuroSCORE 23.0 +/- 12.8%, STS score 9.4 +/- 6.9%). The incidence of new PPM was 28.3%. Interventricular septum thickness and logistic Euroscore were the baseline independent predictors of PPM. When procedural variables were included, the independent predictors of PPM were interventricular septum thickness (OR 0.52; 95% CI 0.320.85) and the distance between noncoronary cusp and the distal edge of the prosthesis (OR 1.37; 95% CI 1.031.83). Conclusions: Conduction abnormalities are frequently observed after TAVI with self-expandable bioprosthesis and definitive pacing is required in about a third of the patients, with a clear association with depth of implant and small interventricular septum thickness. (c) 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Resumo:
Atrioventricular (AV) conduction impairment is well described after surgical aortic valve replacement, but little is known in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). We assessed AV conduction and need for a permanent pacemaker in patients undergoing TAVI with the Medtronic CoreValve Revalving System (MCRS) or the Edwards Sapien Valve (ESV). Sixty-seven patients without pre-existing permanent pacemaker were included in the study. Forty-one patients (61%) and 26 patients (39%) underwent successful TAVI with the MCRS and ESV, respectively. Complete AV block occurred in 15 patients (22%), second-degree AV block in 4 (6%), and new left bundle branch block in 15 (22%), respectively. A permanent pacemaker was implanted in 23 patients (34%). Overall PR interval and QRS width increased significantly after the procedure (p <0.001 for the 2 comparisons). Implantation of the MCRS compared to the ESV resulted in a trend toward a higher rate of new left bundle branch block and complete AV block (29% vs 12%, p = 0.09 for the 2 comparisons). During follow-up, complete AV block resolved in 64% of patients. In multivariable regression analysis pre-existing right bundle branch block was the only independent predictor of complete AV block after TAVI (relative risk 7.3, 95% confidence interval 2.4 to 22.2). In conclusion, TAVI is associated with impairment of AV conduction in a considerable portion of patients, patients with pre-existing right bundle branch block are at increased risk of complete AV block, and complete AV block resolves over time in most patients.
Resumo:
Coronary artery disease (CAD) is frequently present in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). While revascularisation affects peri-operative outcome in patients undergoing surgical aortic valve replacement, the impact of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients undergoing TAVI is not well established.
Resumo:
Aortic stenosis has become the most frequent type of valvular heart disease in Europe and North America and presents in the large majority of patients as calcified aortic stenosis in adults of advanced age. Surgical aortic valve replacement has been recognized to be the definitive therapy which improves considerably survival for severe aortic stenosis since more than 40 years. In the most recent period, operative mortality of isolated aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis varies between 1–3% in low-risk patients younger than 70 years and between 4 and 8% in selected older adults. Long-term survival following aortic valve replacement is close to that observed in a control population of similar age. Numerous observational studies have consistently demonstrated that corrective surgery in symptomatic patients is invariably followed by a subjective improvement in quality of life and a substantial increase in survival rates. More recently, transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has been demonstrated to be feasible in patients with high surgical risk using either a retrograde transfemoral or transsubclavian approach or an antegrade, transapical access. Reported 30-day mortality ranges between 5 and 15%) and is acceptable when compared to the risk predicted by the logistic EuroSCORE (varying between 20 and 35%) and the STS Score, although the EuroScore has been shown to markedly overestimate the effective operative risk. One major concern remains the high rate of paravalvular regurgitation which is observed in up to 85% of the patients and which requires further follow-up and critical evaluation. In addition, long-term durability of these valves with a focus on the effects of crimping remains to be addressed, although 3-5 year results are promising. Sutureless biological valves were designed to simplify and significantly accelerate the surgical replacement of a diseased valve and allow complete excision of the calcified native valve. Until now, there are 3 different sutureless prostheses that have been approved. The 3f Enable valve from ATS-Medtronic received CE market approval in 2010, the Perceval S from Sorin during Q1 of 2011 and the intuity sutureless prosthesis from Edwards in 2012. All these devices aim to facilitate valve surgery and therefore have the potential to decrease the invasivness and to shorten the conventional procedure without compromise in term of excision of the diseased valve. This review summarizes the history and the current knowledge of sutureless valve technology.
Resumo:
AimsTranscatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is an established treatment alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement in high-risk and inoperable patients and outcomes among patients with estimated low or intermediate risk remain to be determined. The aim of this study was to assess clinical outcomes among patients with estimated low or intermediate surgical risk undergoing TAVI.Methods and resultsBetween August 2007 and October 2011, 389 consecutive patients underwent TAVI and were categorized according to the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score into low (STS < 3%; n = 41, 10.5%), intermediate (STS ≥3% and ≤8%, n = 254, 65.3%), and high-risk (STS > 8%; n = 94, 24.2%) groups for the purpose of this study. Significant differences were found between the groups (low risk vs. intermediate risk vs. high risk) for age (78.2 ± 6.7 vs. 82.7 ± 5.7 vs. 83.7 ± 4.9, P < 0.001), body mass index (28.1 ± 6.1 vs. 26.5 ± 4.9 vs. 24.4 ± 4.6, P < 0.001), chronic renal failure (34 vs. 67 vs. 90%, P < 0.001), all-cause mortality at 30 days (2.4 vs. 3.9 vs. 14.9%, P = 0.001), and all-cause mortality at 1 year (10.1 vs. 16.1 vs. 34.5%, P = 0.0003). No differences were observed with regards to cerebrovascular accidents and myocardial infarction during 1-year follow-up.ConclusionIn contemporary practice, TAVI is not limited to inoperable or STS-defined high-risk patients and should be guided by the decision of an interdisciplinary Heart Team. Compared with patients at calculated high risk, well-selected patients with STS-defined intermediate or low risk appear to have favourable clinical outcomes.
Improvement of physical and mental health after transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation
Resumo:
Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has emerged as a treatment alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement in elderly high-risk patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis. In this patient population, rapid improvement or restoration of quality of life (QoL) is at least as important as improved clinical outcomes. The purpose of the present study was to assess changes in QoL in response to TAVI.