Division of Cardiology, MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC.
Division of Cardiology, MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC.
Am J Cardiol. 2014 Jan 15;113(2):342-7. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2013.09.031. Epub 2013 Oct 4.
In patients with aortic stenosis who cannot have surgery, transcatheter aortic valve replacement using the Edwards SAPIEN valve has been shown to improve survival rate and is approved for commercial use in the United States. This study aims to assess the clinical profile, procedural characteristics, and in-hospital complications in patients treated with a commercial SAPIEN valve outside the clinical trial context. We retrospectively analyzed 69 consecutive patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement with a commercial SAPIEN valve compared with 55 Placement of AoRTic traNscathetER valves (PARTNER) trial patients from cohort B enrolled in the same institution by the same Heart Team. Compared with the commercial group, patients in the PARTNER cohort B had higher mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons score (10 ± 5 vs 9 ± 4, p = 0.04) and a lower rate of peripheral arterial disease (19% vs 44%, p = 0.004). Most patients in the commercial group had the procedure under conscious sedation (83% vs 66%, p = 0.03). Planned surgical cut down for vascular access was rare in the commercial group (1.4% vs 46%, p <0.001). The overall rates of major vascular complications, life-threatening or major bleeding, and blood transfusions were lower in commercial group (7.2% vs 27%, p = 0.003; 2.9% vs 16%, p = 0.01; and 28% vs 60%, p <0.001, respectively). In-hospital all-cause mortality (5.8% vs 9.1%, p = 0.51) and stroke rates (7.2% vs 14.5%, p = 0.19) were not statistically different between groups. The median length of hospitalization (p <0.001) and postprocedural length of stay (p = 0.01) was shorter in the commercial group. In conclusion, transfemoral commercial use of the Edwards SAPIEN valve for inoperable patients shows similar in-hospital mortality and stroke rates compared with PARTNER cohort B. The refinements in the procedure such as more conscious sedation, experience of the operators, and careful vascular planning in the commercial group led to lesser vascular and bleeding complications and shorter length of stay.
在不能接受手术的主动脉瓣狭窄患者中,经导管主动脉瓣置换术(TAVR)使用 Edwards SAPIEN 瓣膜已被证明可提高生存率,并已获得美国商业使用的批准。本研究旨在评估在临床试验环境之外使用商业 SAPIEN 瓣膜治疗患者的临床特征、手术特点和院内并发症。我们回顾性分析了 69 例连续接受商业 SAPIEN 瓣膜 TAVR 的患者,并与同一机构、同一心脏团队纳入的 PARTNER 队列 B 中的 55 例 Placement of AoRTic traNscathetER valves(PARTNER)试验患者进行了比较。与商业组相比,PARTNER 队列 B 的患者平均胸外科医生协会评分较高(10±5 比 9±4,p=0.04),外周动脉疾病发生率较低(19%比 44%,p=0.004)。商业组大多数患者在镇静下接受手术(83%比 66%,p=0.03)。商业组计划行血管切开术以获取血管通路的情况很少见(1.4%比 46%,p<0.001)。商业组主要血管并发症、危及生命或大出血和输血的总体发生率较低(7.2%比 27%,p=0.003;2.9%比 16%,p=0.01;28%比 60%,p<0.001)。院内全因死亡率(5.8%比 9.1%,p=0.51)和卒中率(7.2%比 14.5%,p=0.19)在两组间无统计学差异。商业组的中位住院时间(p<0.001)和术后住院时间(p=0.01)较短。总之,经股动脉商业化使用 Edwards SAPIEN 瓣膜治疗不能手术的患者,与 PARTNER 队列 B 相比,院内死亡率和卒中率相似。商业组在手术过程中采用更多的镇静、操作者的经验以及仔细的血管规划等改进措施,导致血管和出血并发症更少,住院时间更短。