Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions · 2017
Comparison of outcomes with surgical cut-down versus percutaneous transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement: TAVR transfemoral access comparisons between surgical cut-down and percutaneous approach.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание 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.
Drafts Brandon C, Choi Charles H, Sangal Kunal, Cammarata Michael W, Applegate Robert J, Gandhi Sanjay K, Kincaid Edward H, Kon Neal, Zhao David X
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: The objective is to compare the short-term (30 days) and late (12 months) vascular adverse events in patients undergoing transfemoral (TF)-transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) by surgical cut-down (SC) vs. percutaneous (PC) approaches.
BACKGROUND: Programs continue to utilize both approaches in TF-TAVR. There are limited data comparing outcomes by SC vs. PC approaches and long-term effects of endovascular intervention facilitated hemostasis on late vascular adverse events.
METHODS: A total of 146 men and women aged 79.7 ± 10.0 years with severe aortic stenosis deemed extreme or high risk for surgery underwent TAVR via TF access. 61 had SC and 85 had PC approaches. Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC-2) outcomes were assessed at an average of 12.1 months after TAVR.
RESULTS: Hospital length of stay (LOS) post-TAVR was shorter for the PC group compared to the SC group (5.1 ± 3.9 vs. 8.2 ± 6.6 days; P < 0.001). More patients were discharged directly to home in the PC than the SC group (85.9% vs. 68.9%, P < 0.05). At 30 days, there were 13/61 (21.3%) and 16/85 (18.8%; P < 0.05) of any vascular events, and 2/61 (3.3%) and 2/85 (2.4%; P = 0.73) major vascular events in the SC and PC groups, respectively. There was no difference in all-cause mortality between the SC (14/61; 23%) and PC groups [17/85 (20%); P = 0.34]. There was no difference in any [4/33 (12%) vs. 3/43 (7%); P = 0.84] or major vascular adverse events [1/33 (3%) vs. 1/43 (2%); P = 0.79] in subjects that underwent adjunctive endovascular intervention compared to those who did not, respectively. There were no statistically significant univariate or multivariate predictors of any vascular event at 12 months when comparing SC to PC groups.
CONCLUSION: For TF TAVR, the PC approach, when compared to the SC approach, is associated with a shorter hospital LOS and higher rate of direct discharge to home with similar risk of vascular complications, late vascular adverse events, and all-cause mortality at 12 months.
BACKGROUND: Programs continue to utilize both approaches in TF-TAVR. There are limited data comparing outcomes by SC vs. PC approaches and long-term effects of endovascular intervention facilitated hemostasis on late vascular adverse events.
METHODS: A total of 146 men and women aged 79.7 ± 10.0 years with severe aortic stenosis deemed extreme or high risk for surgery underwent TAVR via TF access. 61 had SC and 85 had PC approaches. Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC-2) outcomes were assessed at an average of 12.1 months after TAVR.
RESULTS: Hospital length of stay (LOS) post-TAVR was shorter for the PC group compared to the SC group (5.1 ± 3.9 vs. 8.2 ± 6.6 days; P < 0.001). More patients were discharged directly to home in the PC than the SC group (85.9% vs. 68.9%, P < 0.05). At 30 days, there were 13/61 (21.3%) and 16/85 (18.8%; P < 0.05) of any vascular events, and 2/61 (3.3%) and 2/85 (2.4%; P = 0.73) major vascular events in the SC and PC groups, respectively. There was no difference in all-cause mortality between the SC (14/61; 23%) and PC groups [17/85 (20%); P = 0.34]. There was no difference in any [4/33 (12%) vs. 3/43 (7%); P = 0.84] or major vascular adverse events [1/33 (3%) vs. 1/43 (2%); P = 0.79] in subjects that underwent adjunctive endovascular intervention compared to those who did not, respectively. There were no statistically significant univariate or multivariate predictors of any vascular event at 12 months when comparing SC to PC groups.
CONCLUSION: For TF TAVR, the PC approach, when compared to the SC approach, is associated with a shorter hospital LOS and higher rate of direct discharge to home with similar risk of vascular complications, late vascular adverse events, and all-cause mortality at 12 months.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
AgedAged, 80 and overAortic ValveCatheterization, PeripheralComputed Tomography AngiographyDatabases, FactualFemaleFemoral ArteryHumansLength of StayMalePatient DischargePuncturesRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsTime FactorsTranscatheter Aortic Valve ReplacementTreatment OutcomeVascular Surgical Procedures