Suppr超能文献

经导管主动脉瓣置换术治疗单纯性主动脉瓣反流。

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Pure Native Aortic Valve Regurgitation.

机构信息

Department of Interventional Cardiology, Cedars-Sinai Heart Institute, Los Angeles, California.

Department of Cardiology, Asklepios Klink St. Georg, Hamburg, Germany.

出版信息

J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017 Dec 5;70(22):2752-2763. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2017.10.006.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Limited data exist about safety and efficacy of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in patients with pure native aortic regurgitation (AR).

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to compare the outcomes of TAVR with early- and new-generation devices in symptomatic patients with pure native AR.

METHODS

From the pure native AR TAVR multicenter registry, procedural and clinical outcomes were assessed according to VARC-2 criteria and compared between early- and new-generation devices.

RESULTS

A total of 331 patients with a mean STS score of 6.7 ± 6.7 underwent TAVR. The early- and new-generation devices were used in 119 patients (36.0%) and 212 patients (64.0%), respectively. STS score tended to be lower in the new-generation device group (6.2 ± 6.7 vs. 7.6 ± 6.7; p = 0.08), but transfemoral access was more frequently used in the early-generation device group (87.4% vs. 60.8%; p < 0.001). Compared with the early-generation devices, the new-generation devices were associated with a significantly higher device success rate (81.1% vs. 61.3%; p < 0.001) due to lower rates of second valve implantation (12.7% vs. 24.4%; p = 0.007) and post-procedural AR ≥ moderate (4.2% vs. 18.8%; p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in major 30-day endpoints between the 2 groups. The cumulative rates of all-cause and cardiovascular death at 1-year follow-up were 24.1% and 15.6%, respectively. The 1-year all-cause mortality rate was significantly higher in the patients with post-procedural AR ≥ moderate compared with those with post-procedural AR ≤ mild (46.1% vs. 21.8%; log-rank p = 0.001). On multivariable analysis, post-procedural AR ≥ moderate was independently associated with 1-year all-cause mortality (hazard ratio: 2.85; 95% confidence interval: 1.52 to 5.35; p = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with the early-generation devices, TAVR using the new-generation devices was associated with improved procedural outcomes in treating patients with pure native AR. In patients with pure native AR, significant post-procedural AR was independently associated with increased mortality.

摘要

背景

关于经导管主动脉瓣置换术(TAVR)治疗单纯原发性主动脉瓣反流(AR)患者的安全性和疗效的数据有限。

目的

本研究旨在比较 TAVR 中早期和新一代器械在有症状的单纯原发性 AR 患者中的应用效果。

方法

从单纯原发性 AR TAVR 多中心注册研究中,根据 VARC-2 标准评估手术和临床结局,并比较早期和新一代器械。

结果

共有 331 例平均 STS 评分为 6.7±6.7 的患者接受了 TAVR。早期和新一代器械分别在 119 例(36.0%)和 212 例(64.0%)患者中使用。新一代器械组 STS 评分倾向于更低(6.2±6.7 比 7.6±6.7;p=0.08),但早期器械组经股动脉入路更常用(87.4%比 60.8%;p<0.001)。与早期器械相比,新一代器械的器械成功率显著更高(81.1%比 61.3%;p<0.001),原因是二次瓣膜植入率较低(12.7%比 24.4%;p=0.007)和术后 AR≥中度的发生率较低(4.2%比 18.8%;p<0.001)。两组之间 30 天主要终点无显著差异。1 年随访时的全因死亡率和心血管死亡率分别为 24.1%和 15.6%。与术后 AR≤轻度的患者相比,术后 AR≥中度的患者 1 年全因死亡率显著更高(46.1%比 21.8%;log-rank p=0.001)。多变量分析显示,术后 AR≥中度与 1 年全因死亡率独立相关(危险比:2.85;95%置信区间:1.52 至 5.35;p=0.001)。

结论

与早期器械相比,TAVR 使用新一代器械在治疗单纯原发性 AR 患者时可获得更好的手术结果。在单纯原发性 AR 患者中,明显的术后 AR 与死亡率增加独立相关。

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

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验