Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions · 2018
The prevalence of computed tomography-defined leaflet thrombosis in intra- versus supra-annular transcatheter aortic valve prostheses.
СтатьяСистематический обзорНазвание 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.
Rashid Hashrul N, Nasis Arthur, Gooley Robert P, Cameron James D, Brown Adam J
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Leaflet thrombosis (LT) defined by computed tomography (CT) following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has been shown to increase cerebrovascular events. The neo-sinus plays an important role in the development of LT. Intra-annular valves (IAV) have a larger neo-sinus when compared to supra-annular valves (SAV), and has been associated with larger thrombus burden. The prevalence of LT with IAV and SAV in a larger, diverse cohort is unknown.
METHODS: We performed a systematic review to assess the prevalence of LT in IAV versus SAV TAVR prostheses. Inclusion criteria were (1) reported CT-defined LT following TAVR, (2) comparison between LT and non-LT cohort, (3) separate registry/database, and (4) fully published status. A total of 2,013 citations were reviewed and 7 studies were included.
RESULTS: Overall, 1,644 patients were included from 7 observational studies and the prevalence of LT following TAVR was 12.8%. The Portico valve system (IAV) had the highest prevalence of LT with 35.2%, followed by Symetis Acurate Neo (SAV) at 15.4% and the Lotus valve system (IAV) at 14.5%. LT occurred more frequently in IAV than SAV (13.5% vs. 7%, P = 0.02). Subanalysis of IAV versus SAV with the exclusion of the Portico valve was performed to ensure results were not influenced by this valve system and revealed IAV still had higher rates of LT (12.1% vs. 7%, P = 0.05).
CONCLUSION: In summary, IAV prostheses appear to be associated with higher rates of LT when compared with SAV.
METHODS: We performed a systematic review to assess the prevalence of LT in IAV versus SAV TAVR prostheses. Inclusion criteria were (1) reported CT-defined LT following TAVR, (2) comparison between LT and non-LT cohort, (3) separate registry/database, and (4) fully published status. A total of 2,013 citations were reviewed and 7 studies were included.
RESULTS: Overall, 1,644 patients were included from 7 observational studies and the prevalence of LT following TAVR was 12.8%. The Portico valve system (IAV) had the highest prevalence of LT with 35.2%, followed by Symetis Acurate Neo (SAV) at 15.4% and the Lotus valve system (IAV) at 14.5%. LT occurred more frequently in IAV than SAV (13.5% vs. 7%, P = 0.02). Subanalysis of IAV versus SAV with the exclusion of the Portico valve was performed to ensure results were not influenced by this valve system and revealed IAV still had higher rates of LT (12.1% vs. 7%, P = 0.05).
CONCLUSION: In summary, IAV prostheses appear to be associated with higher rates of LT when compared with SAV.