Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2023
Distal aortic biomechanics after transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement: a hypothesis generating study.
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.
Rong Lisa Q, Zheng William, Martinez Andrew, Rahouma Mohammed, Devereux Richard B, Kim Jiwon, Osman Bassam, Palumbo Maria C, Redfors Björn, Girardi Leonard N, Weinsaft Jonathan W, Gaudino Mario
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Biomechanical effects of transcatheter (TAVR) versus surgical (SAVR) aortic valve interventions on the distal aorta have not been studied. This study utilized global circumferential strain (GCS) to assess post-procedural biomechanics changes in the descending aorta after TAVR versus SAVR.
METHODS: Patients undergoing TAVR or SAVR for aortic stenosis were included. Transesophageal (TEE) and transthoracic (TTE) echocardiography short-axis images of the aorta were used to image the descending aorta immediately before and after interventions. Image analysis was performed with two-dimensional speckle tracking echocardiography and dedicated software. Delta GCS was calculated as: post-procedural GCS-pre-procedural GCS. Percentage delta GCS was calculated as: (delta GCS/pre-procedural GCS) × 100.
RESULTS: Eighty patients, 40 TAVR (median age 81 y/o, 40% female) and 40 SAVR (median 72 y/o, 30% female) were included. The post-procedure GCS was significantly higher than the pre-procedural GCS in the TAVR (median 10.7 [interquartile range IQR 4.5, 14.6] vs. 17.0 [IQR 6.1, 20.9], p = 0.009) but not in the SAVR group (4.4 [IQR 3.3, 5.3] vs. 4.7 [IQR 3.9, 5.6], p = 0.3). The delta GCS and the percentage delta GCS were both significantly higher in the TAVR versus SAVR group (2.8% [IQR 1.4, 6] vs. 0.15% [IQR - 0.6, 1.5], p < 0.001; and 28.8% [IQR 14.6%, 64.6%] vs. 4.4% [IQR - 10.6%, 5.6%], p = 0.006). Results were consistent after multivariable adjustment for key clinical and hemodynamic characteristics.
CONCLUSIONS: After TAVR, there was a significantly larger increase in GCS in the distal aorta compared to SAVR. This may impact descending aortic remodeling and long-term risk of aortic events.
METHODS: Patients undergoing TAVR or SAVR for aortic stenosis were included. Transesophageal (TEE) and transthoracic (TTE) echocardiography short-axis images of the aorta were used to image the descending aorta immediately before and after interventions. Image analysis was performed with two-dimensional speckle tracking echocardiography and dedicated software. Delta GCS was calculated as: post-procedural GCS-pre-procedural GCS. Percentage delta GCS was calculated as: (delta GCS/pre-procedural GCS) × 100.
RESULTS: Eighty patients, 40 TAVR (median age 81 y/o, 40% female) and 40 SAVR (median 72 y/o, 30% female) were included. The post-procedure GCS was significantly higher than the pre-procedural GCS in the TAVR (median 10.7 [interquartile range IQR 4.5, 14.6] vs. 17.0 [IQR 6.1, 20.9], p = 0.009) but not in the SAVR group (4.4 [IQR 3.3, 5.3] vs. 4.7 [IQR 3.9, 5.6], p = 0.3). The delta GCS and the percentage delta GCS were both significantly higher in the TAVR versus SAVR group (2.8% [IQR 1.4, 6] vs. 0.15% [IQR - 0.6, 1.5], p < 0.001; and 28.8% [IQR 14.6%, 64.6%] vs. 4.4% [IQR - 10.6%, 5.6%], p = 0.006). Results were consistent after multivariable adjustment for key clinical and hemodynamic characteristics.
CONCLUSIONS: After TAVR, there was a significantly larger increase in GCS in the distal aorta compared to SAVR. This may impact descending aortic remodeling and long-term risk of aortic events.