• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
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
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
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 @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

用于治疗失败的主动脉外科生物瓣膜的自膨胀经导管心脏瓣膜的匹配比较:来自瓣中瓣国际数据注册库(VIVID)的见解

Matched Comparison of Self-Expanding Transcatheter Heart Valves for the Treatment of Failed Aortic Surgical Bioprosthesis: Insights From the Valve-in-Valve International Data Registry (VIVID).

作者信息

Alnasser Sami, Cheema Asim N, Simonato Matheus, Barbanti Marco, Edwards Jeremy, Kornowski Ran, Horlick Eric, Wijeysundera Harindra C, Testa Luca, Bedogni Francesco, Amrane Hafid, Walther Thomas, Pelletier Marc, Latib Azeem, Laborde Jean-Claude, Hildick-Smith David, Kim Won-Keun, Tchetche Didier, Agrifoglio Marco, Sinning Jan-Malte, van Boven Ad J, Kefer Joëlle, Frerker Christian, van Mieghem Nicolas M, Linke Axel, Worthley Stephen, Asgar Anita, Sgroi Carmelo, Aziz Mina, Danenberg Haim D, Labinaz Marino, Manoharan Ganesh, Cheung Anson, Webb John G, Dvir Danny

机构信息

From the St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Canada (S.A., A.N.C., J.E.); St. Paul's Hospital, Vancouver, Canada (M.S., M. Aziz, A.C., J.G.W., D.D.); Ferrarotto Hospital, University of Catania, Italy (M.B., C.S.); Rabin Medical Center, Tel Aviv, Israel (R.K.); Peter Munk Cardiac Center, Toronto, Canada (E.H.); Schulich Heart Centre, Division of Cardiology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada (H.C.W.); Department of Cardiology, IRCCS Pol. S. Donato, Milan, Italy (L.T., F.B.); Medisch Centrum Leeuwarden, Netherlands (H.A., A.J.v.B.); Kerckhoff-Klinik Bad Nauheim, Germany (T.W., W.-K.K.); New Brunswick Heart Center, Saint John, Canada (M.P.); San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy (A. Latib); St. George's Hospital, London, England (J.-C.L.); Sussex Cardiac Centre, Brighton, England (D.H.-S.); Clinique Pasteur, Toulouse, France (D.T.); Centro Cardiologico Monzino, Milan, Italy (M. Agrifoglio); Heart Center, University Hospital Bonn, Germany (J.-M.S.); University Clinics Saint Luc, Brussels, Belgium (J.K.); Asklepios Klinik St. Georg Hospital, Hamburg, Germany (C.F.); Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands (N.M.v.M.); Heart Center, University of Leipzig, Germany (A. Linke); Royal Adelaide Hospital, Australia (S.W.); Montreal Heart Institute, Canada (A.A.); Hadassah Hebrew University Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel (H.D.D.); Ottawa Heart Institute, Canada (M.L.); and Royal Victoria Hospital, Belfast, United Kingdom (G.M.).

出版信息

Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2017 Apr;10(4). doi: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.116.004392.

DOI:10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.116.004392
PMID:28400461
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation is an established therapy for high-risk patients with failed surgical aortic bioprosthesis. There are limited data comparing outcomes of valve-in-valve implantation using different transcatheter heart valves (THV).

METHODS AND RESULTS

Patients included in the Valve-in-Valve International Data registry (VIVID) and treated with self-expanding THV devices were analyzed using centralized core laboratory blinded to clinical events. St. Jude Medical Portico versus Medtronic CoreValve were compared in a 1:2 fashion after propensity score matching. A total of 162 patients, Portico- (n=54) and CoreValve- (n=108) based valve-in-valve procedures comprised the study population with no significant difference in baseline characteristics (age, 79±8.2 years; 60% women; mean STS [Society of Thoracic Surgery] score 8.1±5.5%). Postimplantation, CoreValve was associated with a larger effective orifice area (1.67 versus 1.31 cm; =0.001), lower mean gradient (14±7.5 versus 17±7.5 mm Hg; =0.02), and lower core laboratory-adjudicated moderate-to-severe aortic insufficiency (4.2% versus 13.7%; =0.04), compared with Portico. Procedural complications including THV malpositioning, second THV requirement, or coronary obstruction were not significantly different between the 2 groups. Survival and stroke rates at 30 days were similar, but overall mortality at 1 year was higher among patients treated with Portico compared with CoreValve (22.6% versus 9.1%; =0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

In this first matched comparison of THVs for valve-in-valve implantations, Portico and CoreValve demonstrated differences in postprocedural hemodynamics and long-term clinical outcomes. Although this could be related to THV design characteristics, the impact of other procedural factors cannot be excluded and require further evaluation.

摘要

背景

经导管瓣中瓣植入术是治疗外科主动脉生物瓣膜功能障碍的高危患者的一种成熟疗法。比较使用不同经导管心脏瓣膜(THV)进行瓣中瓣植入术的结果的数据有限。

方法与结果

纳入瓣膜内瓣膜国际数据注册研究(VIVID)并接受自膨胀THV装置治疗的患者,由对临床事件不知情的中央核心实验室进行分析。在倾向得分匹配后,以1:2的比例比较圣犹达医疗Portico瓣膜与美敦力CoreValve瓣膜。共有162例患者接受了基于Portico瓣膜(n = 54)和CoreValve瓣膜(n = 108)的瓣中瓣手术,构成研究人群,其基线特征无显著差异(年龄79±8.2岁;60%为女性;胸外科医师协会[STS]平均评分8.1±5.5%)。植入后,与Portico瓣膜相比,CoreValve瓣膜的有效瓣口面积更大(1.67对1.31平方厘米;P = 0.001),平均梯度更低(14±7.5对17±7.5毫米汞柱;P = 0.02),且核心实验室判定的中重度主动脉瓣关闭不全发生率更低(4.2%对13.7%;P = 0.04)。两组间包括THV位置不当、需要植入第二个THV或冠状动脉阻塞在内的手术并发症无显著差异。30天时的生存率和卒中率相似,但与CoreValve瓣膜治疗的患者相比,Portico瓣膜治疗的患者1年时的总体死亡率更高(22.6%对9.1%;P = 0.03)。

结论

在首次对用于瓣中瓣植入的THV进行的匹配比较中,Portico瓣膜和CoreValve瓣膜在术后血流动力学和长期临床结局方面存在差异。虽然这可能与THV设计特征有关,但不能排除其他手术因素的影响,需要进一步评估。

相似文献

1
Matched Comparison of Self-Expanding Transcatheter Heart Valves for the Treatment of Failed Aortic Surgical Bioprosthesis: Insights From the Valve-in-Valve International Data Registry (VIVID).用于治疗失败的主动脉外科生物瓣膜的自膨胀经导管心脏瓣膜的匹配比较:来自瓣中瓣国际数据注册库(VIVID)的见解
Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2017 Apr;10(4). doi: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.116.004392.
2
Bioprosthetic Valve Performance After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement With Self-Expanding Versus Balloon-Expandable Valves in Large Versus Small Aortic Valve Annuli: Insights From the CHOICE Trial and the CHOICE-Extend Registry.经导管主动脉瓣置换术后生物瓣性能:自膨式瓣膜与球囊扩张式瓣膜在大瓣环与小瓣环中的比较:来自 CHOICE 试验和 CHOICE-Extend 注册研究的结果。
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2018 Dec 24;11(24):2507-2518. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2018.07.050. Epub 2018 Nov 28.
3
Implantation and 30-Day Follow-Up on All 4 Valve Sizes Within the Portico Transcatheter Aortic Bioprosthetic Family.在 Portico 经导管主动脉生物瓣系列中所有 4 种瓣架尺寸的植入和 30 天随访。
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2017 Aug 14;10(15):1538-1547. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2017.05.021.
4
Self-expanding Portico Valve Versus Balloon-expandable SAPIEN XT Valve in Patients With Small Aortic Annuli: Comparison of Hemodynamic Performance.小主动脉瓣环患者使用自膨式Portico瓣膜与球囊扩张式SAPIEN XT瓣膜的比较:血流动力学性能对比
Rev Esp Cardiol (Engl Ed). 2016 May;69(5):501-8. doi: 10.1016/j.rec.2015.08.019. Epub 2015 Dec 29.
5
Transcatheter Replacement of Failed Bioprosthetic Valves: Large Multicenter Assessment of the Effect of Implantation Depth on Hemodynamics After Aortic Valve-in-Valve.经导管置换失败的生物瓣膜:主动脉瓣中瓣植入深度对血流动力学影响的大型多中心评估
Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2016 Jun;9(6). doi: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.115.003651.
6
Three Generations of Self-Expanding Transcatheter Aortic Valves: A Report From the STS/ACC TVT Registry.三代自膨式经导管主动脉瓣:STS/ACC TVT 注册研究报告。
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2020 Jan 27;13(2):170-179. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2019.08.035.
7
1-Year Outcomes of the CENTERA-EU Trial Assessing a Novel Self-Expanding Transcatheter Heart Valve.评估新型自膨式经导管心脏瓣膜的 CENTERA-EU 试验的 1 年结果。
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2019 Apr 8;12(7):673-680. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2019.01.231.
8
A Direct Comparison of Self-Expandable Portico Versus Balloon-Expandable Sapien 3 Devices for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Case-Matched Cohort Study.经导管主动脉瓣置换术中自膨胀式Portico与球囊扩张式Sapien 3装置的直接比较:一项病例匹配队列研究。
J Invasive Cardiol. 2019 Jul;31(7):E199-E204.
9
Valve Type, Size, and Deployment Location Affect Hemodynamics in an In Vitro Valve-in-Valve Model.瓣叶类型、大小和植入位置对体外瓣中瓣模型血流动力学的影响。
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016 Aug 8;9(15):1618-28. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2016.05.030. Epub 2016 Jul 13.
10
Transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation (VinV-TAVR) for failed surgical aortic bioprosthetic valves.经导管瓣膜内植入术(VinV-TAVR)治疗失败的外科生物瓣主动脉瓣。
Clin Res Cardiol. 2019 Jan;108(1):83-92. doi: 10.1007/s00392-018-1326-z. Epub 2018 Jul 12.

引用本文的文献

1
Valve type and post-dilation impact on transprosthetic gradients in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve-in-valve procedure.瓣膜类型和球囊后扩张对接受经导管主动脉瓣中瓣手术患者跨瓣压差的影响。
Eur Heart J Imaging Methods Pract. 2025 May 14;3(1):qyaf048. doi: 10.1093/ehjimp/qyaf048. eCollection 2025 Jan.
2
Comparison of two self-expanding transcatheter heart valves for degenerated surgical bioprostheses: the AVENGER multicentre registry.两种自膨式经导管心脏瓣膜治疗退行性外科生物瓣衰败的比较:AVENGER 多中心注册研究。
EuroIntervention. 2024 Mar 18;20(6):e363-e375. doi: 10.4244/EIJ-D-23-00779.
3
Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation for Degenerated Surgical Aortic Bioprosthesis: A Systematic Review.
经导管主动脉瓣植入术治疗退化性外科主动脉生物瓣膜:一项系统评价。
Heart Views. 2022 Jan-Mar;23(1):1-9. doi: 10.4103/heartviews.heartviews_25_22. Epub 2022 May 16.
4
Bovine pericardial versus porcine stented replacement mitral valves: early hemodynamic performance and clinical results of a randomized comparison of the Perimount and the Mosaic valves.牛心包瓣膜与猪带支架置换二尖瓣:Perimount瓣膜和Mosaic瓣膜随机比较的早期血流动力学性能及临床结果
J Thorac Dis. 2021 Jan;13(1):262-269. doi: 10.21037/jtd-20-3274.
5
Allegra Transcatheter Heart Valve inside a Degenerated Sutureless Aortic Bioprosthesis.阿莱格拉经导管心脏瓣膜植入退化的无缝合主动脉生物假体内部。
Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Rep. 2021 Jan;10(1):e1-e5. doi: 10.1055/s-0040-1721483. Epub 2021 Jan 19.
6
Neo Left Main Channel Creation Using Double Stenting Alongside a Sapien 3 Aortic Valve Bioprosthesis for Left Main Coronary Obstruction Following Valve-in-Valve Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Case Report With Review of Literature.在经导管主动脉瓣置换术(瓣中瓣)后,使用双支架辅助Sapien 3主动脉瓣生物假体创建新左主支血管以治疗左主冠状动脉阻塞:一例病例报告并文献复习
J Investig Med High Impact Case Rep. 2018 Mar 30;6:2324709618767696. doi: 10.1177/2324709618767696. eCollection 2018 Jan-Dec.