CHU Lille, Institut Coeur Poumon, Cardiology, Department of Interventional Cardiology for Coronary, Valves and Structural Heart Diseases, Lille, France.
EuroIntervention. 2021 Oct 1;17(8):e680-e687. doi: 10.4244/EIJ-D-20-01423.
Balloon aortic valvuloplasty (BAV) has been proposed as a therapeutic option in patients suffering from severe aortic stenosis (SAS) who need urgent non-cardiac surgery (NCS). Whether this strategy is better than medical therapy in this very specific population is unknown.
We aimed to evaluate the clinical benefit of an invasive strategy (IS) with preoperative BAV in patients with SAS requiring urgent NCS.
From 2011 to 2019, a registry conducted in two centres included 133 patients with SAS undergoing urgent NCS, of whom 93 underwent preoperative BAV (IS) and 40 a conservative strategy (CS) without BAV. All analyses were adjusted for confounding using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) (10 clinical and anatomical variables).
The primary outcome was MACE at one-month follow-up after NCS including mortality, heart failure, and other cardiovascular outcomes. In patients managed conservatively, occurrence of MACE was 20.0% (n=8) and death was 10.0% (n=4) at 1 month. In patients undergoing BAV, the occurrence of MACE was 20.4% (n=19) and death was 5.4% (n=5) at 1 month. Among patients undergoing conservative management, all events were observed after NCS while, in patients undergoing BAV, 12.9% (n=12) had events between BAV and NCS including 3 deaths, and 7.5% (n=7) had events after NCS including 2 deaths. In IPTW propensity analyses, the incidence of the primary outcome (20.4% vs 20.0%; OR 0.93, 95% CI: 0.38-2.29) and three-month survival (89.2% vs 90.0%; IPTW-adjusted HR 0.90, 95% CI: 0.31-2.60) were similar in both groups.
Patients with SAS managed conservatively before urgent NCS are at high risk of events. A systematic invasive strategy using BAV does not provide a significant improvement in clinical outcome.
球囊主动脉瓣成形术(BAV)已被提议作为需要紧急非心脏手术(NCS)的严重主动脉瓣狭窄(SAS)患者的治疗选择。在这种非常特殊的人群中,这种策略是否优于药物治疗尚不清楚。
我们旨在评估术前 BAV 对 SAS 患者接受紧急 NCS 治疗的侵入性策略(IS)的临床获益。
2011 年至 2019 年,在两个中心进行的一项登记研究纳入了 133 名 SAS 患者,他们需要紧急 NCS,其中 93 名患者接受了术前 BAV(IS),40 名患者接受了无 BAV 的保守治疗策略(CS)。所有分析均使用逆概率治疗加权(IPTW)(10 个临床和解剖学变量)进行调整以消除混杂因素。
主要结局是 NCS 后一个月的 MACE,包括死亡率、心力衰竭和其他心血管结局。在接受保守治疗的患者中,MACE 的发生率为 20.0%(n=8),1 个月时死亡为 10.0%(n=4)。在接受 BAV 的患者中,MACE 的发生率为 20.4%(n=19),1 个月时死亡为 5.4%(n=5)。在接受保守治疗的患者中,所有事件均发生在 NCS 后,而在接受 BAV 的患者中,12.9%(n=12)的患者在 BAV 和 NCS 之间发生事件,包括 3 例死亡,7.5%(n=7)的患者在 NCS 后发生事件,包括 2 例死亡。在 IPTW 倾向评分分析中,主要结局的发生率(20.4%vs20.0%;OR0.93,95%CI:0.38-2.29)和三个月生存率(89.2%vs90.0%;IPTW 调整 HR0.90,95%CI:0.31-2.60)在两组之间相似。
在接受紧急 NCS 之前接受保守治疗的 SAS 患者发生事件的风险较高。使用 BAV 的系统侵入性策略并不能显著改善临床结局。