Safety and Efficacy of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in the Treatment of Pure Aortic Regurgitation in Native Valves and Failing Surgical Bioprostheses: Results From an International Registry Study.
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
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.
Sawaya Fadi J, Deutsch Marcus-André, Seiffert Moritz, Yoon Sung-Han, Codner Pablo, Wickramarachchi Upul, Latib Azeem, Petronio A Sonia, Rodés-Cabau Josep, Taramasso Maurizio, Spaziano Marco, Bosmans Johan, Biasco Luigi, Mylotte Darren, Savontaus Mikko, Gheeraert Peter, Chan Jason, Jørgensen Troels H, Sievert Horst, Mocetti Marco, Lefèvre Thierry, Maisano Francesco, Mangieri Antonio, Hildick-Smith David, Kornowski Ran, Makkar Raj, Bleiziffer Sabine, Søndergaard Lars, De Backer Ole
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Limited data are available about the "off-label" use of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) to treat pure severe AR.
METHODS: The study population consisted of patients with pure severe AR treated by TAVR at 18 different centers. Study endpoints were device success, early safety, and clinical efficacy at 30 days, as defined by Valve Academic Research Consortium 2 criteria.
RESULTS: A total of 146 patients were included, 78 patients in the NAVR group and 68 patients in the failing SHV group. In the NAVR group, device success, early safety, and clinical efficacy were 72%, 66%, and 61%, respectively. Device success and clinical efficacy were significantly better with newer generation THVs compared with old-generation THVs (85% vs. 54% and 75% vs. 46%, respectively, p < 0.05); this was mainly due to less second THV implantations and a lower rate of moderate to severe paravalvular regurgitation (10% vs. 24% and 3% vs. 27%, respectively). Independent predictors of 30-day mortality were body mass index <20 kg/m2, STS surgical risk score >8%, major vascular or access complication, and moderate to severe AR. In the failing SHV group, device success, early safety, and clinical efficacy were 71%, 90%, and 77%, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: TAVR for pure NAVR remains a challenging condition, with old-generation THVs being associated with THV embolization and migration and significant paravalvular regurgitation. Newer generation THVs show more promising outcomes. For those patients with severe AR due to failing SHVs, TAVR is a valuable therapeutic option.