RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Central Illustration : Performance of the SHARPEN Score and the Charlson Comorbidity Index for In-Hospital and Post-Discharge Mortality Prediction in Infective Endocarditis. BACKGROUND: SHARPEN was the first dedicated score for in-hospital mortality prediction in infective endocarditis (IE) regardless of cardiac surgery. OBJECTIVES: To analyze the ability of the SHARPEN score to predict in-hospital and post-discharge mortality and compare it with that of the Charlson comorbidity index (CCI). METHODS: Retrospective cohort study including definite IE (Duke modified criteria) admissions from 2000 to 2016. The area under the ROC curve (AUC-ROC) was calculated to assess predictive ability. Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression was performed. P-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: We studied 179 hospital admissions. In-hospital mortality was 22.3%; 68 (38.0%) had cardiac surgery. Median (interquartile range, IQR) SHARPEN and CCI scores were 9(7-11) and 3(2-6), respectively. SHARPEN had better in-hospital mortality prediction than CCI in non-operated patients (AUC-ROC 0.77 vs. 0.62, p = 0.003); there was no difference in overall (p = 0.26) and in operated patients (p = 0.41). SHARPEN > 10 at admission was associated with decreased in-hospital survival in the overall (HR 3.87; p < 0.001), in non-operated (HR 3.46; p = 0.006) and operated (HR 6.86; p < 0.001) patients. CCI > 3 at admission was associated with worse in-hospital survival in the overall (HR 3.0; p = 0.002), and in operated patients (HR 5.57; p = 0.005), but not in non-operated patients (HR 2.13; p = 0.119). Post-discharge survival was worse in patients with SHARPEN > 10 (HR 3.11; p < 0.001) and CCI > 3 (HR 2.63; p < 0.001) at admission; however, there was no difference in predictive ability between these groups. CONCLUSION: SHARPEN was superior to CCI in predicting in-hospital mortality in non-operated patients. There was no difference between the scores regarding post-discharge mortality.
Assuntos
Endocardite , Alta do Paciente , Humanos , Assistência ao Convalescente , Estudos Retrospectivos , Hospitais , ComorbidadeRESUMO
Background: Acute kidney injury (AKI) is frequently observed after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Of note, it is associated with a threefold increase in all-cause and cardiac death. We propose a new non-contrast strategy for evaluating and performing the TAVI procedure that can be especially valuable for patients with aortic stenosis (AS) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) to prevent AKI. Methods: Patients with severe symptomatic AS and CKD stage ≥3a were evaluated for TAVI using four non-contrast imaging modalities for procedural planning: transesophageal echocardiogram (TEE), cardiac magnetic resonance, multidetector computed tomography (MDCT), and aortoiliac CO2 angiography. Patients underwent transfemoral (TF) TAVI using the self-expandable Evolut R/Pro, and the procedures were guided by fluoroscopy and TEE. Contrast MDCT and contrast injection at certain checkpoints during the procedure were used in a blinded fashion to guarantee patient safety. Results: A total of 25 patients underwent TF-TAVI with the zero-contrast technique. The mean age was 79.9 ± 6.1 years, 72% in NYHA class III/IV, with a mean STS-PROM of 3.0% ± 1.5%, and creatinine clearance of 49 ± 7 ml/min. The self-expandable Evolut R and Pro were implanted in 80% and 20% of patients, respectively. In 36% of the cases, the transcatheter heart valve (THV) chosen was one size larger than the one by contrast MDCT, but none of these cases presented adverse events. Device success and the combined safety endpoint (at 30 days) both achieved 92%. Pacemaker implantation was needed in 17%. Conclusion: This pilot study demonstrated that the zero-contrast technique for procedural planning and THV implantation was feasible and safe and might become the preferable strategy for a significant population of CKD patients undergoing TAVR. Future studies with a larger number of patients are still needed to confirm such interesting findings.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Central Illustration : Percutaneous Strategies in Structural Heart Diseases: Focus on Chronic Heart Failure Transcatheter devices for monitoring and treating advanced chronic heart failure patients. PA: pulmonary artery; LA: left atrium; AFR: atrial flow regulator; TASS: Transcatheter Atrial Shunt System; VNS: vagus nerve stimulation; BAT: baroreceptor activation therapy; RDN: renal sympathetic denervation; F: approval by the American regulatory agency (FDA); E: approval by the European regulatory agency (CE Mark). BACKGROUND: Innovations in devices during the last decade contributed to enhanced diagnosis and treatment of patients with cardiac insufficiency. These tools progressively adapted to minimally invasive strategies with rapid, widespread use. The present article focuses on actual and future directions of device-related diagnosis and treatment of chronic heart failure.
Assuntos
Insuficiência Cardíaca , Humanos , Insuficiência Cardíaca/terapia , Simpatectomia , Átrios do Coração , RimRESUMO
Patients presenting with aortic stenosis and atrial fibrillation (AF) undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are commonly at increased risk for stroke and bleeding complications. Concomitant left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) after TAVR may be an alternative to oral anticoagulation (OAC).Between 2018 and 2022, 7 consecutive patients who were ineligible for OAC underwent simultaneous TAVR and LAAO. The mean age was 84.9⯱â¯4.9â¯years. The mean CHA2DS2-VASc, HAS-BLED, and STS predicted risk of mortality scores were 5.9⯱â¯0.7, 3.9⯱â¯1.1, and 8.8⯱â¯3.4%, respectively. The median follow-up time was 23 (1 to 27) months. All procedures achieved technical success and no adverse events were observed during follow-up. This case series shows that concomitant TAVR and LAAO is feasible and safe among patients with severe aortic stenosis and AF who are deemed ineligible for OAC. Learning objectives: Atrial fibrillation is the most common arrhythmia in the transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) population. In those who experience major or life-threatening bleeding, mortality is doubled. We report a case series of 7 concomitant left atrial appendage occlusions (LAAO) after TAVR in patients ineligible for oral anticoagulation. All procedures achieved technical success and no adverse events were observed. The simultaneous approach with TAVR and LAAO was feasible and safe in this case series.
RESUMO
Resumo Fundamento O SHARPEN foi o primeiro escore desenvolvido especificamente para a predição de mortalidade hospitalar em pacientes com endocardite infecciosa (EI), independentemente da realização de cirurgia cardíaca. Objetivos Analisar a capacidade do escore SHARPEN na predição de mortalidade hospitalar e mortalidade após a alta e compará-la à do Índice de Comorbidade de Charlson (ICC). Métodos Estudo retrospectivo do tipo coorte incluindo internações por EI (segundo os critérios de Duke modificados) entre 2000 e 2016. A área sob a curva ROC (AUC-ROC) foi calculada para avaliar a capacidade preditiva. Curvas de Kaplan-Meier e regressão de Cox foram realizadas. Um valor de p < 0,05 foi considerado estatisticamente significativo. Resultados Estudamos 179 internações hospitalares. A mortalidade hospitalar foi 22,3%; 68 (38,0%) foram submetidos à cirurgia cardíaca. Os escores SHARPEN e ICC (mediana e intervalo interquartil) foram, respectivamente, 9(7-11) e 3(2-6). O escore SHARPEN mostrou melhor predição de mortalidade hospitalar em comparação ao ICC nos pacientes não operados (AUC-ROC 0,77 vs. 0,62, p = 0,003); não foi observada diferença no grupo total (p=0,26) ou nos pacientes operados (p=0,41). Escore SHARPEN >10 na admissão foi associado a uma menor sobrevida hospitalar no grupo total (HR 3,87; p < 0,001), nos pacientes não operados (HR 3,46; p = 0,006) e de pacientes operados (HR 6,86; p < 0,001) patients. ICC > 3 na admissão foi associada a pior sobrevida hospitalar nos grupos total (HR 3,0; p = 0,002), de pacientes operados (HR 5,57; p = 0,005), mas não nos pacientes não operados (HR 2,13; p = 0,119). A sobrevida após a alta foi pior nos pacientes com SHARPEN > 10 (HR 3,11; p < 0,001) e ICC > 3 (HR 2,63; p < 0,001) na internação; contudo, não houve diferença na capacidade preditiva entre esses grupos. Conclusão O SHARPEN escore foi superior ao ICC na predição de mortalidade hospitalar nos pacientes não operados. Não houve diferença entre os escores quanto à mortalidade após a alta.
Abstract Background SHARPEN was the first dedicated score for in-hospital mortality prediction in infective endocarditis (IE) regardless of cardiac surgery. Objectives To analyze the ability of the SHARPEN score to predict in-hospital and post-discharge mortality and compare it with that of the Charlson comorbidity index (CCI). Methods Retrospective cohort study including definite IE (Duke modified criteria) admissions from 2000 to 2016. The area under the ROC curve (AUC-ROC) was calculated to assess predictive ability. Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression was performed. P-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results We studied 179 hospital admissions. In-hospital mortality was 22.3%; 68 (38.0%) had cardiac surgery. Median (interquartile range, IQR) SHARPEN and CCI scores were 9(7-11) and 3(2-6), respectively. SHARPEN had better in-hospital mortality prediction than CCI in non-operated patients (AUC-ROC 0.77 vs. 0.62, p = 0.003); there was no difference in overall (p = 0.26) and in operated patients (p = 0.41). SHARPEN > 10 at admission was associated with decreased in-hospital survival in the overall (HR 3.87; p < 0.001), in non-operated (HR 3.46; p = 0.006) and operated (HR 6.86; p < 0.001) patients. CCI > 3 at admission was associated with worse in-hospital survival in the overall (HR 3.0; p = 0.002), and in operated patients (HR 5.57; p = 0.005), but not in non-operated patients (HR 2.13; p = 0.119). Post-discharge survival was worse in patients with SHARPEN > 10 (HR 3.11; p < 0.001) and CCI > 3 (HR 2.63; p < 0.001) at admission; however, there was no difference in predictive ability between these groups. Conclusion SHARPEN was superior to CCI in predicting in-hospital mortality in non-operated patients. There was no difference between the scores regarding post-discharge mortality.
RESUMO
Resumo As inovações em dispositivos ao longo das últimas décadas proporcionaram uma melhora no diagnóstico e tratamento de pacientes com insuficiência cardíaca. Essas novas ferramentas progressivamente adaptaram-se a estratégias minimamente invasivas e as opções percutâneas multiplicaram-se de forma rápida. No presente artigo revisamos as direções atuais e futuras dos dispositivos utilizados como opções adjuvantes para o diagnóstico e tratamento adjuvante na insuficiência cardíaca crônica, o seu desenvolvimento, mecanismos e estudos mais recentes
Abstract Innovations in devices during the last decade contributed to enhanced diagnosis and treatment of patients with cardiac insufficiency. These tools progressively adapted to minimally invasive strategies with rapid, widespread use. The present article focuses on actual and future directions of device-related diagnosis and treatment of chronic heart failure.