International journal of cardiology · 2020
The prognostic value of immediate post-TAVI hemodynamic evaluation is superior to aortography and transoesophageal echocardiography in predicting patient survival.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Dekany Gabor, Fontos Geza, Satish Sai, Szabo Gergely, Pinter Tunde, Piroth Zsolt, Vertesaljai Marton, Pal Matyas, Mandzak Adrienn, Gulyas Zalan, Gharehdaghi Sara, Ferenci Tamas, Andreka Peter
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Although post-TAVI PAR is commonly seen, its exact evaluation, grading and the true impact on patients' survival are still debated. This single center study aimed to evaluate the effect of post transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) paravalvular aortic regurgitation (PAR) on patients' survival. The outcome was evaluated by the three most commonly used techniques just after TAVI in the interventional arena.
METHODS: 201 high risk patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis underwent TAVI with the self-expandable system. The severity of post-TAVI PAR was prospectively evaluated by aortography and transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) using a four-class scheme and hemodynamic evaluation by calculation of the regurgitation index (RI). Median follow up time was 763 days.
RESULTS: Post-TAVI PAR results of the three different modalities were concordant with each other (all p < 0.001). Patients with grade 0-I PAR by aortography had better long term outcomes compared to those who had grade II-III PAR (unadjusted HR 1.77 [95% CI, 1.04-3.01], p = 0.03). Although in multivariate analysis neither aortography nor TEE were shown to be significant predictors of survival, hemodynamic assessment using the exact RI result was a significant predictor of survival and its effect was found to be linear (adjusted HR 0.72 [95% CI, 0.52-0.98] for 10% point increase in RI, p = 0.03595).
CONCLUSIONS: Among the three modalities that are frequently used to evaluate the outcome, post-TAVI RI showed the highest added predictive value for survival.
METHODS: 201 high risk patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis underwent TAVI with the self-expandable system. The severity of post-TAVI PAR was prospectively evaluated by aortography and transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) using a four-class scheme and hemodynamic evaluation by calculation of the regurgitation index (RI). Median follow up time was 763 days.
RESULTS: Post-TAVI PAR results of the three different modalities were concordant with each other (all p < 0.001). Patients with grade 0-I PAR by aortography had better long term outcomes compared to those who had grade II-III PAR (unadjusted HR 1.77 [95% CI, 1.04-3.01], p = 0.03). Although in multivariate analysis neither aortography nor TEE were shown to be significant predictors of survival, hemodynamic assessment using the exact RI result was a significant predictor of survival and its effect was found to be linear (adjusted HR 0.72 [95% CI, 0.52-0.98] for 10% point increase in RI, p = 0.03595).
CONCLUSIONS: Among the three modalities that are frequently used to evaluate the outcome, post-TAVI RI showed the highest added predictive value for survival.