JACC. Cardiovascular interventions · 2018
Outcomes Following Urgent/Emergent Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Insights From the STS/ACC TVT Registry.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНаблюдательное 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.
Kolte Dhaval, Khera Sahil, Vemulapalli Sreekanth, Dai Dadi, Heo Stephan, Goldsweig Andrew M, Aronow Herbert D, Elmariah Sammy, Inglessis Ignacio, Palacios Igor F, Thourani Vinod H, Sharaf Barry L, Gordon Paul C, Abbott J Dawn
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to examine outcomes and identify independent predictors of mortality among patients undergoing urgent/emergent transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).
BACKGROUND: Data on urgent/emergent TAVR as a rescue therapy for decompensated severe aortic stenosis (AS) are limited.
METHODS: The Society of Thoracic Surgeons and the American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Valve Therapy (STS/ACC TVT) Registry linked with Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services claims was used to identify patients who underwent urgent/emergent versus elective TAVR between November 2011 and June 2016. Outcomes assessed were device success rate, in-hospital major adverse events, and 30-day and 1-year mortality. Independent predictors of mortality after urgent/emergent TAVR were examined.
RESULTS: Of 40,042 patients who underwent TAVR, 3,952 (9.9%) were urgent/emergent (median STS PROM score 11.8 [interquartile range: 7.6 to 17.9]). Device success rate was statistically lower, but not clinically different after urgent/emergent versus elective TAVR (92.6% vs. 93.7%; p = 0.007). Rates of major and/or life-threatening bleeding, major vascular complications, myocardial infarction, stroke, new permanent pacemaker placement, conversion to SAVR, and paravalvular regurgitation were similar between the 2 groups. Compared with elective TAVR, patients undergoing urgent/emergent TAVR had higher rates of acute kidney injury and/or new dialysis (8.2% vs. 4.2%; p < 0.001), 30-day mortality (8.7% vs. 4.3%, adjusted hazard ratio: 1.28, 95% confidence interval: 1.10 to 1.48), and 1-year mortality (29.1% vs. 17.5%, adjusted hazard ratio: 1.20, 95% confidence interval: 1.10 to 1.31). In patients undergoing urgent/emergent TAVR, non-femoral access and cardiopulmonary bypass were associated with increased risk, whereas use of balloon-expandable valve was associated with decreased risk of 30-day and 1-year mortality.
CONCLUSIONS: Urgent/emergent TAVR is feasible with acceptable outcomes and may be a reasonable option in a selected group of patients with severe AS.
BACKGROUND: Data on urgent/emergent TAVR as a rescue therapy for decompensated severe aortic stenosis (AS) are limited.
METHODS: The Society of Thoracic Surgeons and the American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Valve Therapy (STS/ACC TVT) Registry linked with Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services claims was used to identify patients who underwent urgent/emergent versus elective TAVR between November 2011 and June 2016. Outcomes assessed were device success rate, in-hospital major adverse events, and 30-day and 1-year mortality. Independent predictors of mortality after urgent/emergent TAVR were examined.
RESULTS: Of 40,042 patients who underwent TAVR, 3,952 (9.9%) were urgent/emergent (median STS PROM score 11.8 [interquartile range: 7.6 to 17.9]). Device success rate was statistically lower, but not clinically different after urgent/emergent versus elective TAVR (92.6% vs. 93.7%; p = 0.007). Rates of major and/or life-threatening bleeding, major vascular complications, myocardial infarction, stroke, new permanent pacemaker placement, conversion to SAVR, and paravalvular regurgitation were similar between the 2 groups. Compared with elective TAVR, patients undergoing urgent/emergent TAVR had higher rates of acute kidney injury and/or new dialysis (8.2% vs. 4.2%; p < 0.001), 30-day mortality (8.7% vs. 4.3%, adjusted hazard ratio: 1.28, 95% confidence interval: 1.10 to 1.48), and 1-year mortality (29.1% vs. 17.5%, adjusted hazard ratio: 1.20, 95% confidence interval: 1.10 to 1.31). In patients undergoing urgent/emergent TAVR, non-femoral access and cardiopulmonary bypass were associated with increased risk, whereas use of balloon-expandable valve was associated with decreased risk of 30-day and 1-year mortality.
CONCLUSIONS: Urgent/emergent TAVR is feasible with acceptable outcomes and may be a reasonable option in a selected group of patients with severe AS.