Suppr超能文献

经股动脉主动脉瓣置换术后就地心脏手术对临床结局的影响。

Impact of On-Site Cardiac Surgery on Clinical Outcomes After Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.

机构信息

3(rd) Medical Department, Cardiology, Intensive Care Medicine and Chest Pain Unit, Wilhelminenhospital, Vienna, Austria.

Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Medical University Graz, Graz, Austria.

出版信息

JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2018 Nov 12;11(21):2160-2167. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2018.07.015.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to investigate the outcome of high-risk and inoperable patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis undergoing transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in hospitals with (iOSCS) versus without institutional on-site cardiac surgery (no-iOSCS).

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines recommend the use of TAVR only in institutions with a department for cardiac surgery on site.

METHODS

In this analysis of the prospective multicenter Austrian TAVI registry, 1,822 consecutive high-risk patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis undergoing transfemoral TAVR were evaluated. A total of 290 (15.9%) underwent TAVR at no-iOSCS centers (no-iOSCS group), whereas the remaining 1,532 patients (84.1%) were treated in iOSCS centers (iOSCS group).

RESULTS

Patients of the no-iOSCS group had a higher perioperative risk defined by the logistic EuroSCORE (20.9% vs. 14.2%; p < 0.001) compared with patients treated in hospitals with iOSCS. Procedural survival was 96.9% in no-iOSCS centers and 98.6% in iOSCS centers (p = 0.034), whereas 30-day survival was 93.1% versus 96.0% (p = 0.039) and 1-year survival was 80.9% versus 86.1% (p = 0.017), respectively. After propensity score matching for confounders procedural survival was 96.9% versus 98.6% (p = 0.162), 93.1% versus 93.8% (p = 0.719) at 30 days, and 80.9% versus 83.4% (p = 0.402) at 1 year.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing transfemoral TAVR in hospitals without iOSCS had a significantly higher baseline risk profile. After propensity score matching short- and long-term mortality was similar between centers with and without iOSCS.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在探讨在有(iOSCS)和无(no-iOSCS)院内心脏外科的医院中,接受经股动脉经导管主动脉瓣置换术(TAVR)的高危和不可手术的严重症状性主动脉瓣狭窄患者的结局。

背景

目前的指南建议仅在有现场心脏外科的机构使用 TAVR。

方法

在这项对前瞻性多中心奥地利 TAVI 登记处的分析中,评估了 1822 例接受经股动脉 TAVR 的高危严重症状性主动脉瓣狭窄患者。共有 290 例(15.9%)在无-iOSCS 中心(无-iOSCS 组)接受 TAVR,而其余 1532 例(84.1%)患者在有 iOSCS 的中心接受治疗(iOSCS 组)。

结果

无-iOSCS 组患者的围手术期风险较高,定义为逻辑 EuroSCORE(20.9%比 14.2%;p<0.001)高于在有 iOSCS 的医院接受治疗的患者。无-iOSCS 中心的手术生存率为 96.9%,而 iOSCS 中心为 98.6%(p=0.034),30 天生存率为 93.1%比 96.0%(p=0.039),1 年生存率为 80.9%比 86.1%(p=0.017)。在对混杂因素进行倾向评分匹配后,手术生存率为 96.9%比 98.6%(p=0.162),30 天生存率为 93.1%比 93.8%(p=0.719),1 年生存率为 80.9%比 83.4%(p=0.402)。

结论

在无 iOSCS 的医院接受经股动脉 TAVR 的患者基线风险谱显著较高。在倾向评分匹配后,有和无 iOSCS 的中心之间的短期和长期死亡率相似。

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