Cardiovascular Division, Department of Medicine, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida.
Temple Heart and Vascular Center, Temple University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (formerly at Cardiovascular Division, Department of Medicine, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida).
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014 Apr 22;63(15):1510-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2013.11.046. Epub 2014 Jan 30.
This study sought to determine the incidence of new-onset atrial fibrillation (AF) associated with different methods of isolated aortic valve replacement (AVR)-transfemoral (TF), transapical (TA), and transaortic (TAo) catheter-based valve replacement and conventional surgical approaches.
The relative incidences of AF associated with the various access routes for AVR have not been well characterized.
In this single-center, retrospective cohort study, we evaluated a total of 231 consecutive patients who underwent AVR for degenerative aortic stenosis (AS) between March 2010 and September 2012. Patients with a history of paroxysmal, persistent, or chronic AF, with bicuspid aortic valves, and patients who died within 48 h after AVR were excluded. A total of 123 patients (53% of total group) qualified for inclusion. Data on documented episodes of new-onset AF, along with all clinical, echocardiographic, procedural, and 30-day follow-up data, were collated.
AF occurred in 52 patients (42.3%). AF incidence varied according to the procedural method. AF occurred in 60% of patients who underwent surgical AVR (SAVR), in 53% after TA-TAVR, in 33% after TAo-TAVR cases, and 14% after TF-TAVR. The episodes occurred at a median time interval of 53 (25th to 75th percentile, 41 to 87) h after completion of the procedure. Procedures without pericardiotomy had an 82% risk reduction of AF compared with those with pericardiotomy (adjusted odds ratio: 0.18; 95% confidence interval: 0.05 to 0.59).
AF was a common complication of AVR with a cumulative incidence of >40% in elderly patients with degenerative AS who underwent either SAVR or TAVR. AF was most common with SAVR and least common with TF-TAVR. Procedures without pericardiotomy were associated with a lower incidence of AF.
本研究旨在确定不同方法(经股动脉(TF)、经心尖(TA)和经主动脉(TAo)导管主动脉瓣置换术以及传统外科手术)的孤立性主动脉瓣置换术(AVR)与新发心房颤动(AF)相关的发生率。
不同 AVR 入路与 AF 相关的相对发生率尚未得到很好的描述。
在这项单中心回顾性队列研究中,我们评估了 2010 年 3 月至 2012 年 9 月期间因退行性主动脉瓣狭窄(AS)接受 AVR 的 231 例连续患者。排除有阵发性、持续性或慢性 AF 病史、二叶式主动脉瓣和 AVR 后 48 小时内死亡的患者。共有 123 例患者(总组的 53%)符合纳入标准。记录新发 AF 的发作,并收集所有临床、超声心动图、手术和 30 天随访数据。
52 例患者(42.3%)发生 AF。AF 发生率根据手术方法而异。外科 AVR(SAVR)后发生 AF 的患者占 60%,TA-TAVR 后为 53%,TAo-TAVR 后为 33%,TF-TAVR 后为 14%。发作发生在手术完成后中位数时间间隔为 53(25 至 75 百分位,41 至 87)小时。与行心包切开术的手术相比,未行心包切开术的手术发生 AF 的风险降低了 82%(调整优势比:0.18;95%置信区间:0.05 至 0.59)。
AF 是退行性 AS 老年患者接受 SAVR 或 TAVR 后常见的 AVR 并发症,累积发生率超过 40%。SAVR 中最常见,TF-TAVR 中最少见。无心包切开术的手术与 AF 发生率较低相关。