Cardiovascular Intervention Research Center, Rajaie Cardiovascular Medical and Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Cardiovascular Intervention Research Center, Rajaie Cardiovascular Medical and Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Am J Cardiol. 2018 Sep 15;122(6):1062-1067. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2018.06.005. Epub 2018 Jun 27.
Endovascular stent implantation has become the treatment of choice for the management of patients with native coarctation of the aorta (CoA). The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of self-expandable stenting (SES) with balloon-expandable stenting (BES) in the treatment of native CoA. In this single-center retrospective study, all patients who underwent SES or BES for the management of native CoA were enrolled. Patients were followed up for a median period of 35 (inter-quartile range 15 to 71) months. The primary outcome of interest was a composite end point consisted of death, surgical repair, re-stenting, re-ballooning, and hospital admission for hypertension crisis. The CoA diameter has changed from 3.2 ± 2.1 to 14.2 ± 4.0 mm in the BES group and from 4.6 ± 2.6 to 12.2 ± 3.7 mm in the SES group (both p <0.001). The procedure was successful with residual pressure gradient <20 mm Hg in 99.0% and 98.6% of patients in the BES and SES groups, respectively. Major adverse events occurred in 6 (8.7%) in the SES groups and 14 (20.3%) in the BES group (p = 0.053). Kaplan-Meier curve showed no difference between the 2 groups in terms of survival from major adverse events (p = 0.10), but when groups were matched for the propensity of stenting methods, SES was associated with lower major adverse events (p = 0.01). In conclusion, the SES and BES methods were safe and durable in our cohort with low rates of adverse events. After adjustment for the propensity of treatment with each stenting method, SES was associated with better outcomes. Regardless of the outcome of each method, it should be noted that the taken approach should be tailored to the patient's anatomy.
血管内支架植入术已成为治疗先天性主动脉缩窄(CoA)的首选方法。本研究旨在比较自膨式支架置入术(SES)和球囊扩张式支架置入术(BES)治疗先天性 CoA 的疗效。本单中心回顾性研究纳入了所有接受 SES 或 BES 治疗的先天性 CoA 患者。患者中位随访时间为 35 个月(四分位距 15 至 71 个月)。主要研究终点为死亡、手术修复、再次支架置入、再次球囊扩张和因高血压危象住院的复合终点。BES 组 CoA 直径从 3.2 ± 2.1 毫米增加至 14.2 ± 4.0 毫米,SES 组从 4.6 ± 2.6 毫米增加至 12.2 ± 3.7 毫米(均 P <0.001)。BES 组和 SES 组各有 99.0%和 98.6%的患者手术成功,残余压力梯度均<20mmHg。SES 组有 6 例(8.7%)和 BES 组有 14 例(20.3%)发生重大不良事件(P = 0.053)。Kaplan-Meier 曲线显示两组在重大不良事件的生存方面无差异(P = 0.10),但在校正了支架置入方法的倾向性后,SES 与较低的重大不良事件相关(P = 0.01)。总之,SES 和 BES 方法在我们的患者队列中安全且持久,不良事件发生率低。在校正每种支架置入方法的倾向性后,SES 与更好的结果相关。无论每种方法的结果如何,都应注意到,所采取的方法应根据患者的解剖结构进行调整。