982 resultados para Transcatheter aortic valve implantation
Resumo:
AbstractBackground:Predicting mortality in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) remains a challenge.Objectives:To evaluate the performance of 5 risk scores for cardiac surgery in predicting the 30-day mortality among patients of the Brazilian Registry of TAVI.Methods:The Brazilian Multicenter Registry prospectively enrolled 418 patients undergoing TAVI in 18 centers between 2008 and 2013. The 30-day mortality risk was calculated using the following surgical scores: the logistic EuroSCORE I (ESI), EuroSCORE II (ESII), Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score, Ambler score (AS) and Guaragna score (GS). The performance of the risk scores was evaluated in terms of their calibration (Hosmer–Lemeshow test) and discrimination [area under the receiver–operating characteristic curve (AUC)].Results:The mean age was 81.5 ± 7.7 years. The CoreValve (Medtronic) was used in 86.1% of the cohort, and the transfemoral approach was used in 96.2%. The observed 30-day mortality was 9.1%. The 30-day mortality predicted by the scores was as follows: ESI, 20.2 ± 13.8%; ESII, 6.5 ± 13.8%; STS score, 14.7 ± 4.4%; AS, 7.0 ± 3.8%; GS, 17.3 ± 10.8%. Using AUC, none of the tested scores could accurately predict the 30-day mortality. AUC for the scores was as follows: 0.58 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.49 to 0.68, p = 0.09] for ESI; 0.54 (95% CI: 0.44 to 0.64, p = 0.42) for ESII; 0.57 (95% CI: 0.47 to 0.67, p = 0.16) for AS; 0.48 (95% IC: 0.38 to 0.57, p = 0.68) for STS score; and 0.52 (95% CI: 0.42 to 0.62, p = 0.64) for GS. The Hosmer–Lemeshow test indicated acceptable calibration for all scores (p > 0.05).Conclusions:In this real world Brazilian registry, the surgical risk scores were inaccurate in predicting mortality after TAVI. Risk models specifically developed for TAVI are required.
Resumo:
Abstract Background: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation has become an option for high-surgical-risk patients with aortic valve disease. Objective: To evaluate the in-hospital and one-year follow-up outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Methods: Prospective cohort study of transcatheter aortic valve implantation cases from July 2009 to February 2015. Analysis of clinical and procedural variables, correlating them with in-hospital and one-year mortality. Results: A total of 136 patients with a mean age of 83 years (80-87) underwent heart valve implantation; of these, 49% were women, 131 (96.3%) had aortic stenosis, one (0.7%) had aortic regurgitation and four (2.9%) had prosthetic valve dysfunction. NYHA functional class was III or IV in 129 cases (94.8%). The baseline orifice area was 0.67 ± 0.17 cm2 and the mean left ventricular-aortic pressure gradient was 47.3±18.2 mmHg, with an STS score of 9.3% (4.8%-22.3%). The prostheses implanted were self-expanding in 97% of cases. Perioperative mortality was 1.5%; 30-day mortality, 5.9%; in-hospital mortality, 8.1%; and one-year mortality, 15.5%. Blood transfusion (relative risk of 54; p = 0.0003) and pulmonary arterial hypertension (relative risk of 5.3; p = 0.036) were predictive of in-hospital mortality. Peak C-reactive protein (relative risk of 1.8; p = 0.013) and blood transfusion (relative risk of 8.3; p = 0.0009) were predictive of 1-year mortality. At 30 days, 97% of patients were in NYHA functional class I/II; at one year, this figure reached 96%. Conclusion: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation was performed with a high success rate and low mortality. Blood transfusion was associated with higher in-hospital and one-year mortality. Peak C-reactive protein was associated with one-year mortality.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND Very few data exist on the clinical impact of permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) after transcatheter aortic valve implantation. The objective of this study was to assess the impact of PPI after transcatheter aortic valve implantation on late outcomes in a large cohort of patients. METHODS AND RESULTS A total of 1556 consecutive patients without prior PPI undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation were included. Of them, 239 patients (15.4%) required a PPI within the first 30 days after transcatheter aortic valve implantation. At a mean follow-up of 22±17 months, no association was observed between the need for 30-day PPI and all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 0.98; 95% confidence interval, 0.74-1.30; P=0.871), cardiovascular mortality (hazard ratio, 0.81; 95% confidence interval, 0.56-1.17; P=0.270), and all-cause mortality or rehospitalization for heart failure (hazard ratio, 1.00; 95% confidence interval, 0.77-1.30; P=0.980). A lower rate of unexpected (sudden or unknown) death was observed in patients with PPI (hazard ratio, 0.31; 95% confidence interval, 0.11-0.85; P=0.023). Patients with new PPI showed a poorer evolution of left ventricular ejection fraction over time (P=0.017), and new PPI was an independent predictor of left ventricular ejection fraction decrease at the 6- to 12-month follow-up (estimated coefficient, -2.26; 95% confidence interval, -4.07 to -0.44; P=0.013; R(2)=0.121). CONCLUSIONS The need for PPI was a frequent complication of transcatheter aortic valve implantation, but it was not associated with any increase in overall or cardiovascular death or rehospitalization for heart failure after a mean follow-up of ≈2 years. Indeed, 30-day PPI was a protective factor for the occurrence of unexpected (sudden or unknown) death. However, new PPI did have a negative effect on left ventricular function over time.
Resumo:
OBJECTIVE To evaluate immediate transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) results and medium-term follow-up in very elderly patients with severe and symptomatic aortic stenosis (AS). METHODS This multicenter, observational and prospective study was carried out in three hospitals. We included consecutive very elderly (> 85 years) patients with severe AS treated by TAVI. The primary endpoint was to evaluate death rates from any cause at two years. RESULTS The study included 160 consecutive patients with a mean age of 87 ± 2.1 years (range from 85 to 94 years) and a mean logistic EuroSCORE of 18.8% ± 11.2% with 57 (35.6%) patients scoring ≥ 20%. Procedural success rate was 97.5%, with 25 (15.6%) patients experiencing acute complications with major bleeding (the most frequent). Global mortality rate during hospitalization was 8.8% (n = 14) and 30-day mortality rate was 10% (n = 16). Median follow up period was 252.24 ± 232.17 days. During the follow-up period, 28 (17.5%) patients died (17 of them due to cardiac causes). The estimated two year overall and cardiac survival rates using the Kaplan-Meier method were 71% and 86.4%, respectively. Cox proportional hazard regression showed that the variable EuroSCORE ≥ 20 was the unique variable associated with overall mortality. CONCLUSIONS TAVI is safe and effective in a selected population of very elderly patients. Our findings support the adoption of this new procedure in this complex group of patients.
Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI): state of the art techniques and future perspectives.
Resumo:
Transcatheter aortic valve therapies are the newest established techniques for the treatment of high risk patients affected by severe symptomatic aortic valve stenosis. The transapical approach requires a left anterolateral mini-thoracotomy, whereas the transfemoral method requires an adequate peripheral vascular access and can be performed fully percutaneously. Alternatively, the trans-subclavian access has been recently proposed as a third promising approach. Depending on the technique, the fine stent-valve positioning can be performed with or without contrast injections. The transapical echo-guided stent-valve implantation without angiography (the Lausanne technique) relies entirely on transoesophageal echocardiogramme imaging for the fine stent-valve positioning and it has been proved that this technique prevents the onset of postoperative contrast-related acute kidney failure. Recent published reports have shown good hospital outcomes and short-term results after transcatheter aortic valve implantation, but there are no proven advantages in using the transfemoral or the transapical technique. In particular, the transapical series have a higher mean logistic Euroscore of 27-35%, a procedural success rate above 95% and a mean 30-day mortality between 7.5 and 17.5%, whereas the transfemoral results show a lower logistic Euroscore of 23-25.5%, a procedural success rate above 90% and a 30-day mortality of 7-10.8%. Nevertheless, further clinical trials and long-term results are mandatory to confirm this positive trend. Future perspectives in transcatheter aortic valve therapies would be the development of intravascular devices for the ablation of the diseased valve leaflets and the launch of new stent-valves with improved haemodynamic, different sizes and smaller delivery systems.
Resumo:
Transcatheter aortic valve implantation is a feasible therapeutic option for selected patients with severe aortic stenosis and high or prohibitive risk for standard surgery. Lung transplant recipients are often considered high-risk patients for heart surgery because of their specific transplant-associated characteristics and comorbidities. We report a case of successful transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement in a lung transplant recipient with a symptomatic severe aortic stenosis, severe left ventricular dysfunction, and end-stage renal failure 9 years after bilateral lung transplantation.
Resumo:
IMPORTANCE: Owing to a considerable shift toward bioprosthesis implantation rather than mechanical valves, it is expected that patients will increasingly present with degenerated bioprostheses in the next few years. Transcatheter aortic valve-in-valve implantation is a less invasive approach for patients with structural valve deterioration; however, a comprehensive evaluation of survival after the procedure has not yet been performed. OBJECTIVE: To determine the survival of patients after transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation inside failed surgical bioprosthetic valves. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Correlates for survival were evaluated using a multinational valve-in-valve registry that included 459 patients with degenerated bioprosthetic valves undergoing valve-in-valve implantation between 2007 and May 2013 in 55 centers (mean age, 77.6 [SD, 9.8] years; 56% men; median Society of Thoracic Surgeons mortality prediction score, 9.8% [interquartile range, 7.7%-16%]). Surgical valves were classified as small (≤21 mm; 29.7%), intermediate (>21 and <25 mm; 39.3%), and large (≥25 mm; 31%). Implanted devices included both balloon- and self-expandable valves. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Survival, stroke, and New York Heart Association functional class. RESULTS: Modes of bioprosthesis failure were stenosis (n = 181 [39.4%]), regurgitation (n = 139 [30.3%]), and combined (n = 139 [30.3%]). The stenosis group had a higher percentage of small valves (37% vs 20.9% and 26.6% in the regurgitation and combined groups, respectively; P = .005). Within 1 month following valve-in-valve implantation, 35 (7.6%) patients died, 8 (1.7%) had major stroke, and 313 (92.6%) of surviving patients had good functional status (New York Heart Association class I/II). The overall 1-year Kaplan-Meier survival rate was 83.2% (95% CI, 80.8%-84.7%; 62 death events; 228 survivors). Patients in the stenosis group had worse 1-year survival (76.6%; 95% CI, 68.9%-83.1%; 34 deaths; 86 survivors) in comparison with the regurgitation group (91.2%; 95% CI, 85.7%-96.7%; 10 deaths; 76 survivors) and the combined group (83.9%; 95% CI, 76.8%-91%; 18 deaths; 66 survivors) (P = .01). Similarly, patients with small valves had worse 1-year survival (74.8% [95% CI, 66.2%-83.4%]; 27 deaths; 57 survivors) vs with intermediate-sized valves (81.8%; 95% CI, 75.3%-88.3%; 26 deaths; 92 survivors) and with large valves (93.3%; 95% CI, 85.7%-96.7%; 7 deaths; 73 survivors) (P = .001). Factors associated with mortality within 1 year included having small surgical bioprosthesis (≤21 mm; hazard ratio, 2.04; 95% CI, 1.14-3.67; P = .02) and baseline stenosis (vs regurgitation; hazard ratio, 3.07; 95% CI, 1.33-7.08; P = .008). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this registry of patients who underwent transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation for degenerated bioprosthetic aortic valves, overall 1-year survival was 83.2%. Survival was lower among patients with small bioprostheses and those with predominant surgical valve stenosis.
Resumo:
AIMS: To evaluate short-term clinical outcomes following transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) using CE-mark approved devices in Switzerland. METHODS AND RESULTS: The Swiss TAVI registry is a national, prospective, multicentre, monitored cohort study evaluating clinical outcomes in consecutive patients undergoing TAVI at cardiovascular centres in Switzerland. From February 2011 to March 2013, a total of 697 patients underwent TAVI for native aortic valve stenosis (98.1%), degenerative aortic bioprosthesis (1.6%) or severe aortic regurgitation (0.3%). Patients were elderly (82.4±6 years), 52% were females, and the majority highly symptomatic (73.1% NYHA III/IV). Patients with severe aortic stenosis (mean gradient 44.8±17 mmHg, aortic valve area 0.7±0.3 cm²) were either deemed inoperable or at high risk for conventional surgery (STS 8.2%±7). The transfemoral access was the most frequently used (79.1%), followed by transapical (18.1%), direct aortic (1.7%) and subclavian access (1.1%). At 30 days, rates of all-cause mortality, cerebrovascular events and myocardial infarction were 4.8%, 3.3% and 0.4%, respectively. The most frequently observed adverse events were access-related complications (11.8%), permanent pacemaker implantation (20.5%) and bleeding complications (16.6%). The Swiss TAVI registry is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01368250). CONCLUSIONS: The Swiss TAVI registry is a national cohort study evaluating consecutive TAVI procedures in Switzerland. This first outcome report provides favourable short-term clinical outcomes in unselected TAVI patients.
Resumo:
Although surgical aortic valve replacement has been the standard of care for patient with severe aortic stenosis, transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is now a fair standard of care for patients not eligible or high risk for surgical treatment. The decision of therapeutic choice between TAVI and surgery considers surgical risk (estimated by the Euro-SCORE and STS-PROM) as well as many parameters that go beyond the assessment of the valvular disease's severity by echocardiography: a multidisciplinary assessment in "Heart Team" is needed to assess each case in all its complexity.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: New generation transcatheter heart valves (THV) may improve clinical outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve implantation. METHODS AND RESULTS: In a nationwide, prospective, multicenter cohort study (Swiss Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Registry, NCT01368250), outcomes of consecutive transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation patients treated with the Sapien 3 THV (S3) versus the Sapien XT THV (XT) were investigated. An overall of 153 consecutive S3 patients were compared with 445 consecutive XT patients. Postprocedural mean transprosthetic gradient (6.5±3.0 versus 7.8±6.3 mm Hg, P=0.17) did not differ between S3 and XT patients, respectively. The rate of more than mild paravalvular regurgitation (1.3% versus 5.3%, P=0.04) and of vascular (5.3% versus 16.9%, P<0.01) complications were significantly lower in S3 patients. A higher rate of new permanent pacemaker implantations was observed in patients receiving the S3 valve (17.0% versus 11.0%, P=0.01). There were no significant differences for disabling stroke (S3 1.3% versus XT 3.1%, P=0.29) and all-cause mortality (S3 3.3% versus XT 4.5%, P=0.27). CONCLUSIONS: The use of the new generation S3 balloon-expandable THV reduced the risk of more than mild paravalvular regurgitation and vascular complications but was associated with an increased permanent pacemaker rate compared with the XT. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation using the newest generation balloon-expandable THV is associated with a low risk of stroke and favorable clinical outcomes. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01368250.
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:
The purpose of the present analysis was to identify predictors of procedural success of percutaneous transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI).
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:
The conventional surgical aortic bioprostheses used for treatment of aortic stenosis (AS) are inherently stenotic in nature. The more favorable mechanical profile of the Medtronic CoreValve bioprosthesis may translate into a better hemodynamic and neurohormonal response.