Surgical aortic valve replacement

外科主动脉瓣置换术
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    主动脉瓣狭窄(AS)是一种普遍存在的瓣膜疾病,由于其令人衰弱的症状和如果不治疗的高死亡率,给医疗保健系统带来了巨大的负担。外科主动脉瓣置换术(SAVR)和经导管主动脉瓣置换术(TAVR)是严重AS的主要干预措施。但是围手术期并发症如出血仍然是一个值得关注的问题。血管性血友病因子(VWF),止血的关键人物,已知在AS中发生改变,并且可能导致在这些患者中观察到的止血失衡。这项前瞻性研究旨在调查人工瓣膜类型之间的关联,尺寸,严重AS患者主动脉瓣置换术(AVR)的术后VWF水平。这项研究涉及39例连续诊断为严重AS并接受SAVR或TAVR的患者。通过阐明与不同人工瓣膜相关的VWF动力学,本研究旨在为个性化瓣膜选择和围手术期管理策略提供有价值的见解.
    Aortic stenosis (AS) is a prevalent valvular disorder that poses a significant burden on healthcare systems due to its debilitating symptoms and high mortality rates if left untreated. Surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) and transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are the primary interventions for severe AS, but perioperative complications such as bleeding remain a concern. Von Willebrand factor (VWF), a crucial player in hemostasis, is known to be altered in AS and may contribute to the hemostatic imbalance observed in these patients. This prospective study aimed to investigate the association between prosthetic valve type, size, and postprocedural VWF levels in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement (AVR) for severe AS. This study involved 39 consecutive patients diagnosed with severe AS who underwent SAVR or TAVR. By elucidating the VWF dynamics associated with different prosthetic valves, this study sought to provide valuable insights into personalized valve selection and perioperative management strategies.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:主动脉瓣病变患者的管理有时会陷入“灰色地带”,其中最佳治疗方法并不简单。使用Perceval生物假体的无缝线主动脉瓣置换术(SUAVR)与经导管主动脉瓣植入术(TAVI)在主动脉瓣置换术的“灰色地带”中的比较优势仍然是一个争论的话题。为了进一步探讨这个问题,我们进行了一项配对研究,单臂,和基于Kaplan-Meier的荟萃分析,比较SUAVR与Perceval生物假体和TAVI的结果,以及评估疗效,安全,在中期和长期随访期间,使用Perceval生物假体的SUAVR的耐久性。方法:PubMed,PubMedCentral,OVIDMedline,科克伦图书馆,Embase,和WebofScience数据库进行了系统搜索。包括所有研究类型,除了研究方案和动物研究,没有时间限制。最后的搜索是在2024年5月进行的。结果:两组之间的永久性起搏器植入(PPI)率无统计学差异。SUAVR显示新发心肌梗死的发生率较低,但与新发房颤和大出血的发生率较高相关。TAVI的左束支传导阻滞和主要血管并发症的发生率较高。结论:我们的发现表明,与TAVI相比,SUAVR具有较低的并发症发生率和良好的中期总生存率。与TAVI相比,SUAVR具有更多优势,可以被认为是主动脉瓣病变“灰色地带”的有价值且有前途的选择。
    Background: The management of patients with aortic valve pathologies can sometimes fall into a \"gray zone\", where the optimal treatment approach is not straightforward. The comparative benefits of sutureless aortic valve replacement (SUAVR) using the Perceval bioprosthesis versus transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) for the \"gray zone\" of aortic valve replacement procedures remain a topic of debate. To further explore this issue, we conducted a study with pairwise, single-arm, and Kaplan-Meier-based meta-analyses to compare the outcomes of SUAVR with the Perceval bioprosthesis versus TAVI, as well as to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and durability of SUAVR with the Perceval bioprosthesis over mid-term and long-term follow-up periods. Methods: The PubMed, PubMed Central, OVID Medline, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science databases were systematically searched. All study types were included, except study protocols and animal studies, without time restrictions. The final search was carried out in May 2024. Results: No statistically significant differences were observed in permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) rates between the two groups. SUAVR showed a lower incidence of new-onset myocardial infarction but was associated with higher rates of new-onset atrial fibrillation and major bleeding. TAVI had higher rates of left bundle branch block and major vascular complications. Conclusions: Our findings show that SUAVR has a lower incidence of complications and a favorable mid-term overall survival compared to TAVI. SUAVR has more advantages compared to TAVI and can be considered a valuable and promising option for the \"grey zone\" of aortic valve pathologies.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:自从引入经导管主动脉瓣置换术(TAVR)以来,严重的主动脉瓣狭窄的治疗已经有了很大的发展,然而,在国家一级进行TAVR或外科主动脉瓣置换术(SAVR)的患者的并发症趋势尚待评估.
    结果:我们使用Medicare数据进行了一项回顾性队列研究,以评估受益人并发症的时间趋势。年龄≥65岁,2012年至2019年期间接受选择性隔离经股动脉TAVR或SAVR治疗。研究终点是指在索引期间和长达30天后发生主要并发症(复合结局)。多变量逻辑回归用于评估TAVR和SAVR的并发症几率。随着时间的推移,对于TAVR和SAVR,随着时间的推移。该队列包括211212名患者(平均±SD年龄,78.6±7.3岁;45.0%女性)。选择性隔离主动脉瓣置换术后指数期间的并发症率从2012年的49%下降到2019年的22%。TAVR的这些下降更明显(41%至>19%,Δ=22%)比SAVR(51%至>47%,Δ=4%)。风险调整后,与2012年的SAVR相比,TAVR发生任何并发症的风险降低47%(P<0.0001),2019年降低78%(P<0.0001).与2012年相比,TAVR与每年并发症的几率降低独立相关,受益幅度随着时间的推移而增加(2013年与2012年:优势比[OR],0.89[95%CI,0.81-0.97];2019年与2012年:或,0.35[95%CI,0.33-0.38])。这些发现对于从索引起30天的并发症是一致的。
    结论:在2012年至2019年期间,Medicare受益人主动脉瓣置换术后并发症的风险显着降低,用TAVR治疗的患者的绝对和相对变化大于SAVR。
    BACKGROUND: The treatment of severe aortic stenosis has evolved considerably since the introduction of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), yet trends in complications for patients undergoing TAVR or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) at a national level have yet to be evaluated.
    RESULTS: We performed a retrospective cohort study using Medicare data to evaluate temporal trends in complications among beneficiaries, aged ≥65 years, treated with elective isolated transfemoral TAVR or SAVR between 2012 and 2019. The study end point was the occurrence of a major complication (composite outcome) during index and up to 30 days after. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess odds of complications for TAVR and SAVR, individually over time, and for TAVR versus SAVR, over time. The cohort included 211 212 patients (mean±SD age, 78.6±7.3 years; 45.0% women). Complication rates during index following elective isolated aortic valve replacement decreased from 49% in 2012 to 22% in 2019. These reductions were more pronounced for TAVR (41% to >19%, Δ=22%) than SAVR (51% to >47%, Δ=4%). After risk adjustment, the risk of any complication with TAVR was 47% (P<0.0001) lower compared with SAVR in 2012, and 78% (P<0.0001) lower in 2019. TAVR was independently associated with reduced odds of complications each year compared with 2012, with the magnitude of benefit increasing over time (2013 versus 2012: odds ratio [OR], 0.89 [95% CI, 0.81-0.97]; 2019 versus 2012: OR, 0.35 [95% CI, 0.33-0.38]). These findings are consistent for complications up to 30 days from index.
    CONCLUSIONS: Between 2012 and 2019, the risk of complications after aortic valve replacement among Medicare beneficiaries decreased significantly, with larger absolute and relative changes among patients treated with TAVR than SAVR.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:性别对经导管主动脉瓣植入术(TAVI)后长期结局的影响尚不确定。我们旨在调查TAVI的性别差异及其对结果的影响。
    方法:此分析使用了来自西班牙TAVI前瞻性注册的数据,其中包括2009年至2021年在46个西班牙中心接受治疗的连续TAVI患者。主要终点是12个月时的全因死亡率。次要终点包括住院和30天死亡率以及TAVI相关并发症。进行调整后的logistic和Cox回归分析。
    结果:该研究包括12253例连续的TAVI患者,平均年龄为81.2±6.4岁。女性(53.9%)年龄较大,STS-PROM评分(7.0±7.0vs6.2±6.7;P<.001)高于男性。总的来说,男性和女性的TAVI相关并发症发生率相似,与性别相关的特定并发症。虽然女性更经常发生院内血管并发症(13.6%vs9.8%;P<.001)和心包填塞(1.5%vs0.6%;P=.009),男性永久性起搏器植入的发生率较高(14.5%vs17.4%;P=.009).医院的全因死亡率也没有差异(3.6%vs3.6%,调整后的赔率比[OR],1.01;95%置信区间[95CI],0.83-1.23;P=.902),30天(4.2%对4.2%,调整或,0.90;95CI,0.65-1.25;P=.564)或1年时(11%对13%,调整后的HR,0.94;[0.80-1.11];P=.60)。
    结论:接受TAVI治疗的女性年龄较大,合并症较男性多,导致性别之间明显的并发症。然而,男性和女性的短期和1年全因死亡率相似.
    OBJECTIVE: Impact of gender on long-term outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) remains uncertain. We aimed to investigate gender-specific differences in TAVI and its impact on outcomes.
    METHODS: This analysis used data from the prospective Spanish TAVI registry, which included consecutive TAVI patients treated in 46 Spanish centers from 2009 to 2021. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality at 12 months. Secondary endpoints included in-hospital and 30-day mortality and TAVI-related complications. Adjusted logistic and Cox regression analyses were performed.
    RESULTS: The study included 12 253 consecutive TAVI patients with a mean age of 81.2 ± 6.4 years. Women (53.9%) were older, and had a higher STS-PROM score (7.0 ± 7.0 vs 6.2 ± 6.7; P < .001) than men. Overall, the TAVI-related complication rate was similar between women and men, with specific gender-related complications. While women more frequently developed in-hospital vascular complications (13.6% vs 9.8%; P < .001) and cardiac tamponade (1.5% vs 0.6%; P = .009), men showed a higher incidence of permanent pacemaker implantation (14.5% vs 17.4%; P = .009). There was no difference in all-cause mortality either in hospital (3.6% vs 3.6%, adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.01; 95% confidence interval [95%CI], 0.83-1.23; P = .902), at 30 days (4.2% vs 4.2%, adjusted OR, 0.90; 95%CI, 0.65-1.25; P = .564) or at 1 year (11% vs 13%, adjusted HR, 0.94; [0.80-1.11]; P = .60).
    CONCLUSIONS: women treated with TAVI are older and have more comorbidities than men, leading to distinct complications between genders. Nevertheless, all-cause mortality in the short-term and at 1-year was similar between men and women.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:外科主动脉瓣置换术(SAVR)是严重钙化性主动脉瓣狭窄的既定治疗方法。心脏手术(ERACS)方案的增强恢复已被证明可以改善选择性心脏手术的结果。COVID-19大流行促使择期手术后早期拔管,以保留重症监护资源。
    目的:研究选择SAVR后6h内拔管对住院时间和ICU住院时间的影响,死亡率,ICU再入院,和术后肺炎。
    方法:对亚琛大学医院的回顾性分析,德国,包括2017年至2022年的数据,并比较了总共73名选择性SAVR患者。其中,23例患者在6h内拔管(EXT组),而50例患者仍插管超过6小时(INT组)。
    结果:INT组术后通气时间较长,需要更多的血管加压药支持,术后肺炎的发生率较高,ICU住院时间更长。总体住院时间没有显着差异,死亡率,或ICU再入院率。
    结论:这项研究表明,早期拔管高危人群,多主动脉瓣置换术患者是安全的,并与肺炎发病率的降低有关,ICU和住院时间较短,加强ERACS协议的好处,在COVID-19大流行期间,优化重症监护使用尤其重要。
    BACKGROUND: Surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) is an established therapy for severe calcific aortic stenosis. Enhanced recovery after cardiac surgery (ERACS) protocols have been shown to improve outcomes for elective cardiac procedures. The COVID-19 pandemic prompted early extubation post-elective surgeries to preserve critical care resources.
    OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of extubating patients within 6 h post-elective SAVR on hospital and ICU length of stay, mortality rates, ICU readmissions, and postoperative pneumonia.
    METHODS: The retrospective analysis at the University Hospital Aachen, Germany, includes data from 2017 to 2022 and compares a total of 73 elective SAVR patients. Among these, 23 patients were extubated within 6 h (EXT group), while 50 patients remained intubated for over 6 h (INT group).
    RESULTS: The INT group experienced longer postoperative ventilation, needed more vasopressor support, had a higher incidence of postoperative pneumonia, and longer ICU length of stay. No significant differences were noted in overall hospital length of stay, mortality, or ICU readmission rates between the groups.
    CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that early extubation in high-risk, multimorbid surgical aortic valve replacement patients is safe, and is associated with a reduction of pneumonia rates, and with shorter ICU and hospital length of stays, reinforcing the benefits of ERACS protocols, especially critical during the COVID-19 pandemic to optimize intensive care use.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    经导管主动脉瓣置换术(TAVR)是中度或高度手术风险的严重主动脉瓣狭窄患者的安全有效的治疗选择。在中期随访中,低风险患者在TAVR后的结果非常令人鼓舞,而该患者子集的长期(≥3年)数据有限。这项荟萃分析旨在比较低风险患者TAVR与外科主动脉瓣置换术(SAVR)后的长期随访。我们搜索了截至2024年7月7日的数据库,以比较低风险患者中TAVR与SAVR的随机临床试验(RCT)(定义为STS-PROM得分低于4%)。(PROSPEROID:CRD42023480495)。分析的主要结果是至少3年随访时的全因死亡。次要结果是:心血管死亡,致残中风,心肌梗死(MI),主动脉瓣再介入,心内膜炎,新发心房颤动,永久性起搏器植入(PPI)和生物瓣膜衰竭(BVF)。共有3项RCT,2,644例患者(TAVR,n=1,371例患者;SAVR,n=1,273名患者)被包括在内。随访时间为6±2.9年。TAVR导致全因死亡不劣于SAVR[RR:0.99(95%CI:0.84-1.17;p=0.89;I2=28%)],心血管死亡[RR:0.94(95%CI:0.76-1.15;p=0.54;I2=0%)],MI[RR:1.06(95%CI:0.71-1.57;p=0.79;I2=61%)],主动脉瓣再介入,心内膜炎和BVF。新发房颤在SAVR组中较高,而PPI在TAVR组中。总之,我们的荟萃分析表明,与选定的SAVR相比,TAVR与类似的长期结果相关,低风险患者。
    Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a safe and effective treatment option for patients with severe aortic stenosis at intermediate or high surgical risk. Results after TAVR in low-risk patients are very encouraging at midterm follow-up, whereas limited long-term (≥3 year) data are available in this subset of patients. This meta-analysis aims to compare the long-term follow-up after TAVR versus surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in low-risk patients. We searched databases up to July 7, 2024 for randomized clinical trials comparing TAVR versus SAVR in low-risk patients (defined as Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality score <4%) (PROSPERO ID: CRD42023480495). Primary outcome analyzed was all-cause death at a minimum of 3 years of follow-up. The secondary outcomes were cardiovascular death, disabling stroke, myocardial infarction, aortic valve reintervention, endocarditis, new-onset atrial fibrillation, permanent pacemaker implantation, and bioprosthetic valve failure. A total of 3 randomized clinical trials with 2,644 patients (TAVR n = 1,371 patients; SAVR n = 1,273 patients) were included. The follow-up time was 6 ± 2.9 years. TAVR resulted noninferior to SAVR for all-cause death (risk ratio [RR] 0.99, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.84 to 1.17, p = 0.89, I2 = 28%), cardiovascular death (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.15, p = 0.54, I2 = 0%), myocardial infarction (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.57, p = 0.79, I2 = 61%), aortic valve reintervention, endocarditis, and bioprosthetic valve failure. New-onset atrial fibrillation was more common in the SAVR group, whereas permanent pacemaker implantation was more common in the TAVR group. In conclusion, our meta-analysis showed that TAVR is associated with similar long-term outcomes compared with SAVR in selected low-risk patients.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:对于手术风险范围内的老年患者,经导管主动脉瓣植入术(TAVI)被认为是外科主动脉瓣置换术(SAVR)的安全有效替代方案。在荷兰,TAVI仅适用于手术风险高的患者。尽管如此,1/5的TAVI患者年龄<75岁。我们旨在比较<75岁的TAVI和SAVR患者的患者特征和预后。
    方法:本研究纳入所有<75岁无活动性心内膜炎的患者,因严重主动脉瓣狭窄而接受TAVI或SAVR治疗,2015年至2020年在伊拉斯谟大学医学中心的混合性主动脉瓣疾病或退化的主动脉生物假体。荷兰权威指南用于对手术风险进行分类。
    结果:对292例患者进行了TAVI,386例患者的SAVR。基于荷兰风险算法,59.6%的TAVI患者和19.4%的SAVR患者处于高手术风险。TAVI和SAVR之间的30天全因死亡率没有差异(2.4%vs0.8%,p=0.083)。TAVI后的一年和5年死亡率高于SAVR后(1年:12.5%vs4.3%,p<0.001;5年:36.8%对12.0%,p<0.001)。在风险类别中,我们发现治疗策略之间没有差异。死亡率的独立预测因素是心血管合并症(左心室射血分数<30%,心房颤动,肺动脉高压)和恶性肿瘤的存在,肝硬化或免疫调节药物的使用。
    结论:在伊拉斯谟大学医学中心,在<75岁的患者中,选择TAVI用于高风险表型,总体上比SAVR具有更高的长期死亡率。我们在风险类别中没有发现更糟糕的结果的证据。
    BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is considered a safe and effective alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for elderly patients across the operative risk spectrum. In the Netherlands, TAVI is reimbursed only for patients with a high operative risk. Despite this, one fifth of TAVI patients are < 75 years of age. We aim to compare patient characteristics and outcomes of TAVI and SAVR patients < 75 years.
    METHODS: This study included all patients < 75 years without active endocarditis undergoing TAVI or SAVR for severe aortic stenosis, mixed aortic valve disease or degenerated aortic bioprosthesis between 2015 and 2020 at the Erasmus University Medical Centre. Dutch authority guidelines were used to classify operative risk.
    RESULTS: TAVI was performed in 292 patients, SAVR in 386 patients. Based on the Dutch risk algorithm, 59.6% of TAVI patients and 19.4% of SAVR patients were at high operative risk. There was no difference in 30-day all-cause mortality between TAVI and SAVR (2.4% vs 0.8%, p = 0.083). One-year and 5‑year mortality was higher after TAVI than after SAVR (1-year: 12.5% vs 4.3%, p < 0.001; 5‑year: 36.8% vs 12.0%, p < 0.001). Within risk categories we found no difference between treatment strategies. Independent predictors of mortality were cardiovascular comorbidities (left ventricular ejection fraction < 30%, atrial fibrillation, pulmonary hypertension) and the presence of malignancies, liver cirrhosis or immunomodulatory drug use.
    CONCLUSIONS: At the Erasmus University Medical Centre, in patients < 75 years, TAVI is selected for higher-risk phenotypes and overall has higher long-term mortality than SAVR. We found no evidence for worse outcome within risk categories.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Editorial
    暂无摘要。
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    基于一系列基础随机临床试验,对于患有严重症状性主动脉瓣狭窄的患者,经导管主动脉瓣置换术已成为外科手术主动脉瓣置换术的安全有效替代方法。值得注意的是,二叶主动脉瓣(BAV)疾病患者被排除在所有这些关键的随机试验之外,由于BAVs通常在主动脉瓣手术或介入治疗的患者中遇到,因此留下了很大的知识空白。在这次全面审查中,我们的目标是为心脏团队提供如何接近BAV病患者的详细见解,专注于二尖瓣的成像和表征,手术方法的概述,以及对BAV病患者经导管主动脉瓣置换术的作用背后的当前数据的理解。
    Transcatheter aortic valve replacement has emerged as a safe and effective alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement for patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis across the spectrum of surgical risks based on a series of foundational randomized clinical trials. Of note, patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) disease were excluded from all these pivotal randomized trials, leaving a significant knowledge gap because BAVs are commonly encountered in patients referred for aortic valve surgery or intervention. In this comprehensive review, we aim to provide heart teams with a detailed insight into how to approach patients with BAV disease, focusing on imaging and characterization of bicuspid valves, an overview of surgical approaches, and an understanding of the current data behind the role of transcatheter aortic valve replacement for patients with BAV disease.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    暂无摘要。
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号