Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros

Bases de datos
Tipo del documento
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
JACC Cardiovasc Interv ; 17(5): 666-677, 2024 Mar 11.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38479966

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Acute ischemic stroke remains a serious complication of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Cerebral embolic protection devices (CEPD) were developed to mitigate the risk of acute ischemic stroke complicating TAVR (AISCT). However, the existing body of evidence does not clearly support CEPD efficacy in AISCT prevention. OBJECTIVES: In a cohort of patients with AISCT, we aimed to compare the characteristics and outcomes of patients who have had unprotected TAVR (CEPD-) vs CEPD-protected TAVR (CEPD+). METHODS: Data were derived from an international multicenter registry focusing on AISCT. We included all patients who experienced ischemic stroke within 72 hours of TAVR. Stroke severity was assessed using the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS). Primary outcomes were neurologic disability status according to the modified Rankin Score at 30 days, and 6-month all-cause death. Propensity score matched analysis was used to control for differences between groups. RESULTS: In 18,725 TAVR procedures, 416 AISCT (2.2%) within 72 hours were documented, of which 376 were in the CEPD- TAVR group and 40 in the CEPD+ TAVR group. Although the middle cerebral artery stroke rate was similar in both groups (29.7% CEPD- vs 33.3% CEPD+; P = 0.71), AISCT in the CEPD+ group was characterized by a lower rate of internal carotid artery occlusion (0% vs 4.7%) and higher rate of vertebrobasilar system strokes (15.4% vs 5.7%; P = 0.04). AISCT was severe (NIHSS ≥15) in 21.6% CEPD- and 23.3% CEPD+ AISCT (P = 0.20). Disabling stroke rates (modified Rankin Score >1 at 30 days) were 47.3% vs 42.5% (P = 0.62), and 6-month mortality was 31.3% vs 23.3% (P = 0.61), in the CEPD- and CEPD+ groups, respectively. In the propensity score matched cohort, disabling stroke rates were 56.5% vs 41.6% (P = 0.16), and 6-month mortality was 33% vs 19.5% (P = 0.35), in the CEPD- and CEPD+ groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In a large cohort of patients with AISCT, the use of CEPD had little effect on stroke distribution, severity, and outcomes.


Asunto(s)
Estenosis de la Válvula Aórtica , Dispositivos de Protección Embólica , Accidente Cerebrovascular Isquémico , Accidente Cerebrovascular , Reemplazo de la Válvula Aórtica Transcatéter , Humanos , Accidente Cerebrovascular Isquémico/etiología , Estenosis de la Válvula Aórtica/diagnóstico por imagen , Estenosis de la Válvula Aórtica/cirugía , Estenosis de la Válvula Aórtica/complicaciones , Resultado del Tratamiento , Accidente Cerebrovascular/diagnóstico por imagen , Accidente Cerebrovascular/etiología , Accidente Cerebrovascular/prevención & control , Factores de Riesgo , Válvula Aórtica/diagnóstico por imagen , Válvula Aórtica/cirugía
2.
JACC Cardiovasc Interv ; 15(18): 1808-1819, 2022 09 26.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36137683

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Despite advances in transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), periprocedural acute ischemic stroke remains a concern. OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to investigate acute ischemic stroke complicating TAVR (AISCT) and to describe the indications and outcomes of interventions to treat AISCT. METHODS: An international multicenter registry was established focusing on AISCT within 30 days of TAVR. Stroke severity was assessed using the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale. Primary outcomes were 1-year all-cause death and neurologic disability status at 90 days according to modified Rankin scale score. RESULTS: Of 16,615 TAVR procedures, 387 patients with AISCT were included (2.3%). Rates of 1-year death were 28.9%, 35.9%, and 77.5% in patients with mild, moderate, and severe stroke, respectively (P < 0.001). Although 348 patients were managed conservatively, 39 patients (10.1%) underwent neurointervention (NI) with either mechanical thrombectomy (n = 26) or thrombolytic therapy (n = 13). In a subanalysis excluding patients with mild stroke, there was no clear 1-year survival benefit for NI compared with conservative management (47.6% vs 41.1%, respectively; P = 0.78). In a logistic regression model controlling for stroke severity, NI was associated with 2.9-fold odds (95% CI: 1.2-7.0; P = 0.016) of independent survival at 90 days. CONCLUSIONS: AISCT carries significant morbidity and mortality, which is correlated with stroke severity. The present findings suggest that neurologic disability for patients with moderate or worse stroke could potentially be improved by timely intervention and highlight the importance of collaboration between cardiologists and neurologists to optimize AISCT outcomes.


Asunto(s)
Estenosis de la Válvula Aórtica , Accidente Cerebrovascular Isquémico , Accidente Cerebrovascular , Reemplazo de la Válvula Aórtica Transcatéter , Válvula Aórtica/diagnóstico por imagen , Válvula Aórtica/cirugía , Estenosis de la Válvula Aórtica/complicaciones , Estenosis de la Válvula Aórtica/diagnóstico por imagen , Estenosis de la Válvula Aórtica/cirugía , Humanos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Sistema de Registros , Factores de Riesgo , Accidente Cerebrovascular/diagnóstico por imagen , Accidente Cerebrovascular/etiología , Accidente Cerebrovascular/terapia , Reemplazo de la Válvula Aórtica Transcatéter/efectos adversos , Resultado del Tratamiento
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA