EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2016
First-in-man report of residual "intra-clip" regurgitation between two MitraClips treated by AMPLATZER Vascular Plug II.
Клинический случайСтатьяНазвание 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.
Taramasso Maurizio, Zuber Michel, Gruner Christiane, Gaemperli Oliver, Nietlispach Fabian, Maisano Francesco
Аннотация
AIMS: We present here the first-in-man case report of a patient with a significant residual "intra-clip" jet treated by the implantation of an AMPLATZER Vascular Plug II.
METHODS AND RESULTS: A 64-year-old gentleman came to our attention for mitral regurgitation (MR) recurrence four years after transcatheter mitral repair with MitraClip. After the implantation of two further MitraClips, residual intra-clip MR was present, without room for a further clip. An AMPLATZER Vascular Plug II was successfully deployed between the two clips. Final echocardiography showed residual mild MR, without any sign of mitral stenosis.
CONCLUSIONS: This case demonstrates the feasibility of the implantation of an AMPLATZER Vascular Plug between two MitraClips to treat significant residual "intra-clip" MR, when the implantation of an adjunctive clip is not feasible. This approach may represent an effective therapeutic solution in case of a significant residual intra-clip jet.
METHODS AND RESULTS: A 64-year-old gentleman came to our attention for mitral regurgitation (MR) recurrence four years after transcatheter mitral repair with MitraClip. After the implantation of two further MitraClips, residual intra-clip MR was present, without room for a further clip. An AMPLATZER Vascular Plug II was successfully deployed between the two clips. Final echocardiography showed residual mild MR, without any sign of mitral stenosis.
CONCLUSIONS: This case demonstrates the feasibility of the implantation of an AMPLATZER Vascular Plug between two MitraClips to treat significant residual "intra-clip" MR, when the implantation of an adjunctive clip is not feasible. This approach may represent an effective therapeutic solution in case of a significant residual intra-clip jet.