Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2025
Choosing a Valve Prosthesis for a Successful Pregnancy. The "Tip of the Iceberg" for a Disease of Complex Evolution.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Avila Walkiria Samuel, Pinto Daniel Vinicius Rodrigues, Brugnara Jessica Sol, Moro Marilia, Moreira Talita Carla Stratti, Borges Isabelle, Miura Nana, Tarasoutchi Flávio
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The choice of valve prosthesis in women planning a pregnancy is still controversial. The durability of biological prostheses and the characteristic thrombogenic of mechanical prostheses are limitations to the pregnancy's successful Objectives: To study the pregnancy success rate after valve prosthesis implantation, and identify the variables related to maternal outcomes.
METHODS: Prospective study with 78 pregnant women with bovine pericardial prosthesis (Group BP) and 50 with a mechanical prosthesis (Group MP), who received prior guidance on the risks of pregnancy. The pregnancy success rate was considered in the absence of complications cardiac, obstetric and/or fetal complications.
RESULTS: Successful pregnancy was achieved in 64 (50.0%) patients, not differing between groups (BP 56.4% vs MP 40.0% - p=0.103). The BP group had a higher cardiac events rate and prosthesis dysfunction (43.6% vs 16.0% p<0.001; 26.9% vs 2.0% p<0.001). The frequency of fetal losses (14.1% vs 24.0% p=0.165) and obstetric complications (28.2% vs 42% p=0.127) were not different between the BP and MP groups. The pre-existence of heart failure (odds ratio 8.5; 95% CI [1.4; 50.7]; p=0.019), atrial fibrillation (odds ratio 16.7; 95% CI [5.7; 49 .1]; p<0.001) and dysfunction of the biological prosthesis (odds ratio 12.6; 95% CI [3.0; 52.7]; p=0.001) were the variables predicting complications and/or deaths.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients with valve prostheses had low maternal-fetal success due to the complicating factors of valve disease, the limited structural survival of biological prostheses and the lack of anticoagulants to guarantee pregnancy. The choice of a prosthesis, whether biological or mechanical, should not be considered an isolated decision, but rather a consequence of a complex outcome of the heart disease.
METHODS: Prospective study with 78 pregnant women with bovine pericardial prosthesis (Group BP) and 50 with a mechanical prosthesis (Group MP), who received prior guidance on the risks of pregnancy. The pregnancy success rate was considered in the absence of complications cardiac, obstetric and/or fetal complications.
RESULTS: Successful pregnancy was achieved in 64 (50.0%) patients, not differing between groups (BP 56.4% vs MP 40.0% - p=0.103). The BP group had a higher cardiac events rate and prosthesis dysfunction (43.6% vs 16.0% p<0.001; 26.9% vs 2.0% p<0.001). The frequency of fetal losses (14.1% vs 24.0% p=0.165) and obstetric complications (28.2% vs 42% p=0.127) were not different between the BP and MP groups. The pre-existence of heart failure (odds ratio 8.5; 95% CI [1.4; 50.7]; p=0.019), atrial fibrillation (odds ratio 16.7; 95% CI [5.7; 49 .1]; p<0.001) and dysfunction of the biological prosthesis (odds ratio 12.6; 95% CI [3.0; 52.7]; p=0.001) were the variables predicting complications and/or deaths.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients with valve prostheses had low maternal-fetal success due to the complicating factors of valve disease, the limited structural survival of biological prostheses and the lack of anticoagulants to guarantee pregnancy. The choice of a prosthesis, whether biological or mechanical, should not be considered an isolated decision, but rather a consequence of a complex outcome of the heart disease.