Suppr超能文献

经导管主动脉瓣置换术中预防急性冠状动脉阻塞的烟囱支架与 BASILICA 比较。

Chimney Stenting vs BASILICA for Prevention of Acute Coronary Obstruction During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.

机构信息

IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano-Milan, Italy.

Department of Cardiology, Heart Centre Leipzig at University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.

出版信息

JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2024 Mar 25;17(6):742-752. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2024.01.007.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Coronary obstruction (CO) is a potentially life-threatening complication of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Chimney stenting or leaflet laceration with transcatheter electrosurgery (Bioprosthetic or Native Aortic Scallop Intentional Laceration to Prevent Iatrogenic Coronary Artery Obstruction [BASILICA]) are 2 techniques developed to prevent CO.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the present study was to compare periprocedural and 1-year outcomes of chimney and BASILICA in TAVR patients at high risk of CO.

METHODS

This multicenter observational registry enrolled consecutive TAVR patients at high risk of CO, undergoing either preventive chimney stenting or BASILICA. Clinical success was defined as successful performance of the chimney or BASILICA technique without clinically relevant ostial CO. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiovascular events, a composite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or unplanned target lesion coronary revascularization at 1 year.

RESULTS

A total of 168 patients were included: 71 (42.3%) received chimney stenting, and 97 (57.7%) underwent BASILICA. Patients undergoing BASILICA had higher preprocedural risk of CO, as indicated by lower sinotubular junction height (18.2 ± 4.8 mm vs 14.8 ± 3.4 mm; P < 0.001) and diameter (28.2 ± 4.5 vs 26.8 ± 3.4; P = 0.029). Rates of periprocedural complications were similar between the 2 groups. Clinical success was 97.2% and 96.9% in chimney and BASILICA, respectively (P = 0.92). At 1-year follow-up, the cumulative incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events was 18.7% (95% CI: 11%-30.6%) in the chimney group and 19.9% (95% CI: 12.1%-31.5%) in the BASILICA group (log-rank P = 0.848), whereas chimney was associated with a numerically higher cardiovascular mortality than BASILICA (6.7% vs 1.3%; log-rank P = 0.168).

CONCLUSIONS

Chimney stenting and BASILICA effectively prevent TAVR-induced acute CO. Both techniques seem to have comparable acceptable periprocedural and 1-year outcomes.

摘要

背景

经导管主动脉瓣置换术(TAVR)后发生冠状动脉阻塞(CO)是一种潜在危及生命的并发症。烟囱支架或经导管电外科切开术(生物瓣或原生主动脉扇贝切开术以预防医源性冠状动脉阻塞 [BASILICA])是两种预防 CO 的技术。

目的

本研究旨在比较 TAVR 高危 CO 患者中预防性烟囱支架置入和 BASILICA 的围手术期和 1 年结果。

方法

这项多中心观察性注册研究纳入了接受 TAVR 治疗的高危 CO 患者,这些患者接受预防性烟囱支架置入或 BASILICA 治疗。临床成功定义为成功实施烟囱或 BASILICA 技术,且无临床相关开口 CO。主要终点是 1 年时的主要不良心血管事件,即死亡、心肌梗死、卒中和计划外靶病变冠状动脉血运重建的复合终点。

结果

共纳入 168 例患者:71 例(42.3%)接受烟囱支架置入,97 例(57.7%)行 BASILICA 治疗。行 BASILICA 治疗的患者 CO 术前风险更高,表现为窦管交界处高度较低(18.2 ± 4.8mm 比 14.8 ± 3.4mm;P<0.001)和直径较小(28.2 ± 4.5mm 比 26.8 ± 3.4mm;P=0.029)。两组围手术期并发症发生率相似。烟囱组和 BASILICA 组的临床成功率分别为 97.2%和 96.9%(P=0.92)。1 年随访时,烟囱组的主要不良心血管事件累积发生率为 18.7%(95%CI:11%-30.6%),BASILICA 组为 19.9%(95%CI:12.1%-31.5%)(对数秩检验 P=0.848),而烟囱组心血管死亡率高于 BASILICA 组(6.7%比 1.3%;对数秩检验 P=0.168)。

结论

烟囱支架和 BASILICA 可有效预防 TAVR 引起的急性 CO。两种技术的围手术期和 1 年结果似乎都可以接受。

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