Modi Roshan D, Ueyama Hiroki A, Tully Andy, Byku Isida, Greenbaum Adam B, Xie Joe X, Gleason Patrick T, Daneshmand Mani, Babaliaros Vasilis C, Keeling Brent
Division of Cardiology, Emory Structural Heart and Valve Center, Emory University Hospital Midtown, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Innovations (Phila). 2025 Jan-Feb;20(1):39-47. doi: 10.1177/15569845241298283. Epub 2025 Jan 24.
Percutaneous vegetation debulking has been reported to treat tricuspid valve infective endocarditis (TVIE), but data on feasibility compared with conventional surgical strategies are limited. We aimed to compare short-term outcomes of suction debulking with partial venovenous bypass to conventional open surgery in this population.
This was a single-center, retrospective study that included all patients with isolated TVIE who underwent suction debulking with partial venovenous bypass or tricuspid valve surgery between January 2010 and December 2022. Patient characteristics, procedural data, and clinical outcomes were compared.
Of the 45 patients included, 16 (35.6%) underwent suction debulking and the remainder (64.4%) underwent surgery. Baseline characteristics were comparable, including high rates of preprocedure hemodialysis (11.1%), prior infectious endocarditis (44.4%), intravenous drug use (60.0%), presence of tricuspid bioprostheses (24.4%), and septic shock (40.0%). Suction debulking had a shorter procedure time than surgery (206 [176 to 224] min vs 400 [325 to 487] min, < 0.001) and was associated with numerically lower rates of various complications including acute kidney injury requiring hemodialysis, limb ischemia, and dysrhythmia requiring pacemaker. Over a mean follow-up period of 473 ± 604 days, recurrent endocarditis (37.5% vs 17.2%, = 0.25) and the need for reintervention (50.0% vs 17.2%, = 0.048) were higher with suction debulking. However, all-cause mortality was similar between the groups (12.5% vs 10.3%, > 0.99).
Suction debulking can safely be performed in patients with isolated TVIE with shorter procedural times and similar midterm all-cause mortality compared with surgery. Suction debulking may be appropriate initial therapy for this complex population.
据报道,经皮清除赘生物可用于治疗三尖瓣感染性心内膜炎(TVIE),但与传统手术策略相比,关于其可行性的数据有限。我们旨在比较在该人群中,采用部分静脉 - 静脉体外循环进行抽吸清除赘生物与传统开放手术的短期结局。
这是一项单中心回顾性研究,纳入了2010年1月至2022年12月期间所有接受了采用部分静脉 - 静脉体外循环进行抽吸清除赘生物或三尖瓣手术的孤立性TVIE患者。比较了患者特征、手术数据和临床结局。
纳入的45例患者中,16例(35.6%)接受了抽吸清除赘生物,其余患者(64.4%)接受了手术。基线特征具有可比性,包括术前血液透析率高(11.1%)、既往感染性心内膜炎(44.4%)、静脉药物使用(60.0%)、存在三尖瓣生物瓣膜(24.4%)以及感染性休克(40.0%)。抽吸清除赘生物的手术时间比手术短(206 [176至224]分钟对400 [325至487]分钟,<0.001),并且在数值上与包括需要血液透析的急性肾损伤、肢体缺血以及需要起搏器治疗的心律失常等各种并发症的发生率较低相关。在平均473±604天的随访期内,抽吸清除赘生物组的复发性心内膜炎(37.5%对17.2%,P = 0.25)和再次干预需求(50.0%对17.2%,P = 0.048)较高。然而,两组之间的全因死亡率相似(12.5%对10.3%,P>0.99)。
对于孤立性TVIE患者,抽吸清除赘生物可以安全地进行,与手术相比,手术时间更短,中期全因死亡率相似。抽吸清除赘生物可能是这类复杂人群合适的初始治疗方法。