文献检索文档翻译深度研究
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
邀请有礼套餐&价格历史记录

新学期,新优惠

限时优惠:9月1日-9月22日

30天高级会员仅需29元

1天体验卡首发特惠仅需5.99元

了解详情
不再提醒
插件&应用
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
高级版
套餐订阅购买积分包
AI 工具
文献检索文档翻译深度研究
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2025

经心尖或股动脉经导管主动脉瓣置换术后临床结局的倾向性匹配比较:放置主动脉经导管瓣膜(PARTNER)-I 试验子研究。

Propensity-matched comparisons of clinical outcomes after transapical or transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a placement of aortic transcatheter valves (PARTNER)-I trial substudy.

机构信息

From Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH (E.H.B., J.R., S.K., E.M.T., L.G.S.); Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN (R.M.S.); Emory University, Atlanta, GA (V.B., V.H.T.); Duke University Clinical Research Institute and Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (P.S.D.); Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, CA (W.F.F., D.C.M.); Columbia University Medical Center/New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York (R.T.H., A.J.K., S.K.K., M.B.L.); Baylor Scott & White Health, Plano, TX (M.M.); Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia (W.Y.S.); and New York University Langone Medical Center, New York (M.R.W.). J.J. Akin is self-employed.

出版信息

Circulation. 2015 Jun 2;131(22):1989-2000. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.114.012525. Epub 2015 Apr 1.


DOI:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.114.012525
PMID:25832034
Abstract

BACKGROUND: The higher risk of adverse outcomes after transapical (TA) versus transfemoral (TF) transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) could be attributable to TA-TAVR being an open surgical procedure or to clinical differences between TA- and TF-TAVR patients. We compared outcomes after neutralizing patient differences using propensity score matching. METHODS AND RESULTS: From April 2007 to February 2012, 1100 Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves (PARTNER)-I patients underwent TA-TAVR and 1521 underwent TF-TAVR with Edwards SAPIEN balloon-expandable bioprostheses. Propensity matching based on 111 preprocedural variables, exclusive of femoral access morphology, identified 501 well-matched patient pairs (46% of possible matches), 95% of whom had peripheral arterial disease. Matched TA-TAVR patients experienced more adverse procedural events, longer length of stay (5 versus 8 days; P<0.0001), and slower recovery (New York Heart Association class I, 31% versus 38% at 30 days, equalizing by 6 months at 51% versus 47%); stroke risk was similar (3.4% versus 3.3% at 30 days and 6.0% versus 6.7% at 3 years); mortality was elevated for the first 6 postprocedural months (19% versus 12%; P=0.01); but aortic regurgitation was less (34% versus 52% mild and 8.9% versus 12% moderate to severe at discharge, P=0.001; 36% versus 50% mild and 10% versus 15% moderate to severe at 6 months, P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The likelihood of adverse periprocedural events and prolonged recovery is greater after TA-TAVR than TF-TAVR in vasculopathic patients after accounting for differences in cardiovascular risk factors, although stroke risk is equivalent and aortic regurgitation is less. As smaller delivery systems permit TF-TAVR in many of these patients, we recommend a TF-first access strategy for TAVR when anatomically feasible. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00530894.

摘要

背景:经心尖(TA)与经股(TF)经导管主动脉瓣置换术(TAVR)相比,前者术后发生不良结局的风险较高,这可能归因于 TA-TAVR 是一种开放式手术,也可能与 TA-TAVR 和 TF-TAVR 患者的临床差异有关。我们使用倾向评分匹配来比较消除患者差异后的结局。

方法和结果:2007 年 4 月至 2012 年 2 月,1100 名接受 TA-TAVR 的 PARTNER-I 患者和 1521 名接受 Edwards SAPIEN 球囊扩张生物假体 TF-TAVR 的患者。基于 111 个术前变量(不包括股动脉入路形态)进行倾向匹配,确定了 501 对匹配良好的患者(可能匹配的 46%),其中 95%患有外周动脉疾病。匹配后的 TA-TAVR 患者经历了更多的不良手术事件,住院时间更长(5 天与 8 天;P<0.0001),恢复速度更慢(30 天纽约心脏协会心功能分级 I 级,31%与 38%,6 个月时相等,分别为 51%与 47%);卒中风险相似(30 天 3.4%与 3.3%,3 年 6.0%与 6.7%);术后 6 个月内死亡率较高(19%与 12%;P=0.01);但主动脉瓣反流较少(出院时轻度 34%与 52%,中度至重度 8.9%与 12%;P=0.001;6 个月时轻度 36%与 50%,中度至重度 10%与 15%;P<0.0001)。

结论:在血管病变患者中,经心尖 TAVR 比经股 TAVR 更易发生围手术期不良事件和恢复时间延长,尽管卒中风险相当,主动脉瓣反流较少。随着较小的输送系统允许许多此类患者进行经股 TAVR,我们建议在解剖学上可行的情况下,TF 优先作为 TAVR 的入路策略。

临床试验注册:网址:http://www.clinicaltrials.gov。唯一标识符:NCT00530894。

相似文献

[1]
Propensity-matched comparisons of clinical outcomes after transapical or transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a placement of aortic transcatheter valves (PARTNER)-I trial substudy.

Circulation. 2015-4-1

[2]
Insights Into Timing, Risk Factors, and Outcomes of Stroke and Transient Ischemic Attack After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in the PARTNER Trial (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves).

Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2016-9

[3]
Immediate and Intermediate Outcome After Transapical Versus Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.

Am J Cardiol. 2016-1-15

[4]
Conventional surgery, sutureless valves, and transapical aortic valve replacement: what is the best option for patients with aortic valve stenosis? A multicenter, propensity-matched analysis.

J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2013-9-8

[5]
Bleeding complications after surgical aortic valve replacement compared with transcatheter aortic valve replacement: insights from the PARTNER I Trial (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valve).

J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013-11-27

[6]
Transapical Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Is Associated With Increased Cardiac Mortality in Patients With Left Ventricular Dysfunction: Insights From the PARTNER I Trial.

JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2017-12-11

[7]
Outcomes after transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a comparison of the randomized PARTNER (Placement of AoRTic TraNscathetER Valves) trial with the NRCA (Nonrandomized Continued Access) registry.

JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2014-11-17

[8]
Long-term outcomes of inoperable patients with aortic stenosis randomly assigned to transcatheter aortic valve replacement or standard therapy.

Circulation. 2014-9-9

[9]
Left ventricular remodeling and function after transapical versus transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2019-1-27

[10]
Direct Comparison of Feasibility and Safety of Transfemoral Versus Transaortic Versus Transapical Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.

JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016-11-28

引用本文的文献

[1]
Transcatheter Mitral Valve Replacement Using Contemporary Dedicated Devices: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Struct Heart. 2025-7-15

[2]
In-hospital outcomes of non-elective transapical transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement.

Sci Rep. 2025-7-10

[3]
Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in low-risk patients: an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc. 2025-5-3

[4]
Transcaval access for transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Ann Med Surg (Lond). 2025-3-28

[5]
SCAI Expert Consensus Statement on Alternative Access for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.

J Soc Cardiovasc Angiogr Interv. 2025-2-25

[6]
Access Options for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.

J Clin Med. 2025-2-28

[7]
A comparative study on iliofemoral artery calcification distribution in alternative TAVR approaches.

Indian J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2025-3

[8]
Long-term outcomes of transapical-transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2024-10-23

[9]
Saudi Heart Association/National Heart Center/Saudi Arabian Cardiac Interventional Society/Saudi Society for Cardiac Surgeons/Saudi Cardiac Imaging Group 2023 TAVI Guidelines.

J Saudi Heart Assoc. 2024-8-15

[10]
Exploring Optimal Strategies for Surgical Access in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation.

J Clin Med. 2024-8-8

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

推荐工具

医学文档翻译智能文献检索