Okuyama Kazuaki, Jilaihawi Hasan, Mirocha James, Nakamura Mamoo, Ramzy Danny, Makkar Raj, Cheng Wen
Cedars-Sinai Heart Institute, Los Angeles, Calif.
Cedars-Sinai Heart Institute, Los Angeles, Calif.
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2015 Mar;149(3):789-97. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2014.10.062. Epub 2014 Oct 17.
For transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), transaortic (TAo) and transapical (TA) approaches are major alternatives in cases unsuitable for the transfemoral approach. Partial J-sternotomy is a widely used access for TAo. However, redo sternotomy or right-sided aorta may preclude this access, and right anterior thoracotomy is potentially beneficial in these cases. This study sought to evaluate the TAo approach using thoracotomy (T-TAo) and compare it to the TAo approach using a sternotomy (S-TAo) and a TA approach.
In a large single-center series, consecutive TAVR patients were studied. Procedural/clinical outcomes of the T-TAo, S-TAo, and TA groups were compared up to a 30 days follow-up period.
Of 872 TAVR patients, 22 (2.5%) were T-TAo, 29 (3.3%) were S-TAo, and 86 (9.9%) were TA approaches. The TA group showed the shortest intensive care unit stay, with a median 2.0 (interquartile range 1.0-3.0) days: for T-TAo it was 3.0 (2.0-5.3) and for S-TAo, 3.0 (3.5-5.0) (P < .001). Although it was not statistically significant, the T-TAo group showed numerically less mortality (1 [4.5%], 5 [17.9%], and 8 [9.4%] in the T-TAo, S-TAo, and TA groups, respectively; P = .30), with no difference in other endpoints, including stroke/transient ischemic attack, rehospitalization, and paravalvular leak. Additionally, computed tomographic assessment revealed that T-TAo facilitated a more coaxial approach than S-TAo: 20.4° ± 8.2° versus 30.6° ± 8.2° (P < .001).
T-TAo is a feasible approach that can provide greater coaxiality. This option allows tailored and optimal access to the individual patient and facilitates a treatment strategy in nontransfemoral TAVR patients.
对于经导管主动脉瓣置换术(TAVR),经主动脉(TAo)和经心尖(TA)入路是不适用于经股动脉入路病例的主要替代方法。部分正中胸骨切开术是TAo广泛使用的入路方式。然而,再次胸骨切开术或右侧主动脉可能无法采用这种入路,而右前开胸术在这些情况下可能有益。本研究旨在评估采用开胸术的TAo入路(T-TAo),并将其与采用胸骨切开术的TAo入路(S-TAo)和TA入路进行比较。
在一个大型单中心系列研究中,对连续的TAVR患者进行研究。比较T-TAo、S-TAo和TA组的手术/临床结局,随访期长达30天。
在872例TAVR患者中,22例(2.5%)采用T-TAo,29例(3.3%)采用S-TAo,86例(9.9%)采用TA入路。TA组在重症监护病房的住院时间最短,中位数为2.0(四分位间距1.0 - 3.0)天;T-TAo组为3.0(2.0 - 5.3)天,S-TAo组为3.0(3.5 - 5.0)天(P <.001)。虽然无统计学意义,但T-TAo组的死亡率在数值上较低(T-TAo组、S-TAo组和TA组分别为1例[4.5%]、5例[17.9%]和8例[9.4%];P =.30),在其他终点方面无差异,包括中风/短暂性脑缺血发作、再次住院和瓣周漏。此外,计算机断层扫描评估显示,T-TAo比S-TAo更容易实现更同轴的入路:分别为20.4°±8.2°和30.6°±8.2°(P <.001)。
T-TAo是一种可行的入路方法,可提供更大的同轴性。该选择允许针对个体患者进行定制化和最佳入路,并促进非经股动脉TAVR患者的治疗策略。