Bongiovanni Dario, Kühl Constantin, Bleiziffer Sabine, Stecher Lynne, Poch Felix, Greif Martin, Mehilli Julinda, Massberg Steffen, Frey Norbert, Lange Rüdiger, Laugwitz Karl-Ludwig, Schymik Gerhard, Frank Derk, Kupatt Christian
I. Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
DZHK (German Center for Cardiovascular Research), Partner Site Munich Heart Alliance, Munich, Germany.
Heart. 2018 Jan;104(1):23-29. doi: 10.1136/heartjnl-2016-311037. Epub 2017 May 31.
The optimal treatment of patients with acute and severe decompensation of aortic stenosis is unclear due to recent advances in transcatheter interventions and supportive therapies. Our aim was to assess the early outcome of emergency transcatheter aortic valve implantation (eTAVI) versus emergency balloon aortic valvuloplasty (eBAV) followed by TAVI under elective circumstances.
Emergency conditions were defined as: cardiogenic shock with requirement of catecholamine therapy, severe acute dyspnoea (NYHA IV), cardiac resuscitation or mechanic respiratory support. The data were collected according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium 2 (VARC-2) criteria.
In five German centres, 23 patients (logistic Euroscore 37.7%±18.1) underwent eTAVI and 118 patients underwent eBAV (logistic Euroscore 35.3%±20.8). In the eTAVI group, immediate procedural mortality was 8.7%, compared with 20.3% for the eBAV group (p=0.19). After 30 days, cardiovascular mortality for the eTAVI group was 23.8% and for the eBAV group 33.0% (p=0.40). Analyses adjusting for potential confounders did not provide evidence of a difference between groups. Of note, the elective TAVI performed after eBAV (n=32, logistic Euroscore 25.9%±13.9) displayed an immediate procedural mortality of 9.4% and a cardiovascular mortality after 30 days of 15.6%. Major vascular complications were significantly more likely to occur after eTAVI (p=0.01) as well as stroke (p=0.01).
In this multicentre cohort, immediate procedural and 30-day mortality of eTAVI and eBAV were high, and mortality of secondary TAVI subsequent to eBAV was higher than expected. Randomised study data are required to define the role of emergency TAVI in tertiary care centres with current device generations.
由于经导管介入治疗和支持治疗的最新进展,急性重度主动脉瓣狭窄失代偿患者的最佳治疗方法尚不清楚。我们的目的是评估急诊经导管主动脉瓣植入术(eTAVI)与急诊球囊主动脉瓣成形术(eBAV)后择期进行TAVI的早期结局。
急诊情况定义为:需要儿茶酚胺治疗的心源性休克、严重急性呼吸困难(纽约心脏协会IV级)、心脏复苏或机械通气支持。数据根据瓣膜学术研究联盟2(VARC-2)标准收集。
在德国的五个中心,23例患者(逻辑欧洲评分37.7%±18.1)接受了eTAVI,118例患者接受了eBAV(逻辑欧洲评分35.3%±20.8)。在eTAVI组中,即刻手术死亡率为8.7%,而eBAV组为20.3%(p=0.19)。30天后,eTAVI组的心血管死亡率为23.8%,eBAV组为33.0%(p=0.40)。对潜在混杂因素进行调整后的分析未提供两组之间存在差异的证据。值得注意的是,eBAV后进行的择期TAVI(n=32,逻辑欧洲评分25.9%±13.9)显示即刻手术死亡率为9.4%,30天后的心血管死亡率为15.6%。eTAVI后发生主要血管并发症(p=0.01)以及中风(p=0.01)的可能性明显更高。
在这个多中心队列中,eTAVI和eBAV的即刻手术死亡率和30天死亡率都很高,eBAV后二次TAVI的死亡率高于预期。需要随机研究数据来确定急诊TAVI在使用当前器械一代的三级护理中心中的作用。