The Annals of thoracic surgery · 2020
Multicenter Comparison of Percutaneous and Surgical Pulmonary Valve Replacement in Large RVOT.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНаблюдательное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ou-Yang Wen-Bin, Qureshi Shakeel, Ge Jun-Bo, Hu Sheng-Shou, Li Shou-Jun, Yang Ke-Ming, Zhang Ge-Jun, Zhou Da-Xin, Chen Mao, Wang Shou-Zheng, Zhang Feng-Wen, Pan Xiang-Bin
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: A percutaneous approach for pulmonary valve replacement (PVR) is a feasible alternative to surgical PVR in selected patients with severe pulmonary regurgitation after repair of tetralogy of Fallot. However, large right ventricular outflow tract (diameter ≥ 25 mm) remains challenging.
METHODS: This retrospective multicenter study enrolled consecutive patients with large right ventricular outflow tract who underwent percutaneous PVR (Venus P-valve, Venus MedTech Inc, Hangzhou, China) (n = 35) or surgical PVR (homograft valve; n = 30) between May 2014 and April 2017. Patients were followed up at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months, and yearly thereafter. Main study outcomes were pulmonary valve function and right ventricular function at discharge and midterm follow-up.
RESULTS: PVR was successful in all patients. Percutaneous compared with surgical PVR group had: similarly distributed baseline characteristics; shorter hospitalization, intensive care unit stay, and endotracheal intubation duration; lower cost; lower pulmonary valve gradient before discharge; lower pulmonary valve regurgitant grade (mean difference, -0.63; 95% CI -1.11 to -0.20, P = .022), pulmonary valve gradient (mean difference, -5.7 mm Hg; 95% CI -9.4 to -2.2 mm Hg, P = .005), and right ventricular end-diastolic volume index (mean difference, -9.5 mL/m2; 95% CI -16.9 to -3.1 mL/m2, P = .022); and greater right ventricular ejection fraction (mean difference, 5.4%; 95% CI 2.4%-8.3%, P = .002) at median 36 months follow-up, without deaths in either group.
CONCLUSIONS: Percutaneous PVR using Venus P-valve appeared to be a safe, efficacious and minimally invasive alternative to surgical PVR in selected patients with large right ventricular outflow tract yielding better right ventricular and pulmonary valve function at midterm follow-up.
METHODS: This retrospective multicenter study enrolled consecutive patients with large right ventricular outflow tract who underwent percutaneous PVR (Venus P-valve, Venus MedTech Inc, Hangzhou, China) (n = 35) or surgical PVR (homograft valve; n = 30) between May 2014 and April 2017. Patients were followed up at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months, and yearly thereafter. Main study outcomes were pulmonary valve function and right ventricular function at discharge and midterm follow-up.
RESULTS: PVR was successful in all patients. Percutaneous compared with surgical PVR group had: similarly distributed baseline characteristics; shorter hospitalization, intensive care unit stay, and endotracheal intubation duration; lower cost; lower pulmonary valve gradient before discharge; lower pulmonary valve regurgitant grade (mean difference, -0.63; 95% CI -1.11 to -0.20, P = .022), pulmonary valve gradient (mean difference, -5.7 mm Hg; 95% CI -9.4 to -2.2 mm Hg, P = .005), and right ventricular end-diastolic volume index (mean difference, -9.5 mL/m2; 95% CI -16.9 to -3.1 mL/m2, P = .022); and greater right ventricular ejection fraction (mean difference, 5.4%; 95% CI 2.4%-8.3%, P = .002) at median 36 months follow-up, without deaths in either group.
CONCLUSIONS: Percutaneous PVR using Venus P-valve appeared to be a safe, efficacious and minimally invasive alternative to surgical PVR in selected patients with large right ventricular outflow tract yielding better right ventricular and pulmonary valve function at midterm follow-up.