RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Balloon aortic valvuloplasty (BAV) has been proposed as a therapeutic option in patients suffering from severe aortic stenosis (SAS) who need urgent non-cardiac surgery (NCS). Whether this strategy is better than medical therapy in this very specific population is unknown. AIMS: We aimed to evaluate the clinical benefit of an invasive strategy (IS) with preoperative BAV in patients with SAS requiring urgent NCS. METHODS: From 2011 to 2019, a registry conducted in two centres included 133 patients with SAS undergoing urgent NCS, of whom 93 underwent preoperative BAV (IS) and 40 a conservative strategy (CS) without BAV. All analyses were adjusted for confounding using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) (10 clinical and anatomical variables). RESULTS: The primary outcome was MACE at one-month follow-up after NCS including mortality, heart failure, and other cardiovascular outcomes. In patients managed conservatively, occurrence of MACE was 20.0% (n=8) and death was 10.0% (n=4) at 1 month. In patients undergoing BAV, the occurrence of MACE was 20.4% (n=19) and death was 5.4% (n=5) at 1 month. Among patients undergoing conservative management, all events were observed after NCS while, in patients undergoing BAV, 12.9% (n=12) had events between BAV and NCS including 3 deaths, and 7.5% (n=7) had events after NCS including 2 deaths. In IPTW propensity analyses, the incidence of the primary outcome (20.4% vs 20.0%; OR 0.93, 95% CI: 0.38-2.29) and three-month survival (89.2% vs 90.0%; IPTW-adjusted HR 0.90, 95% CI: 0.31-2.60) were similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with SAS managed conservatively before urgent NCS are at high risk of events. A systematic invasive strategy using BAV does not provide a significant improvement in clinical outcome.
Assuntos
Estenose da Valva Aórtica , Valvuloplastia com Balão , Substituição da Valva Aórtica Transcateter , Valva Aórtica/diagnóstico por imagem , Valva Aórtica/cirurgia , Estenose da Valva Aórtica/cirurgia , Humanos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Fatores de Risco , Substituição da Valva Aórtica Transcateter/efeitos adversos , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Impaired left ventricular (LV) speckle-tracking-derived global longitudinal strain (GLS) magnitude (GLS worse than 14.7%) has been associated with poor outcome in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) and preserved LV ejection fraction (EF). OBJECTIVES: To test the hypothesis that GLS magnitude ≤ 15% obtained with vendor-independent speckle-tracking strain software may be able to identify patients with severe AS who are at higher risk of death, despite preserved LVEF and no or mild symptoms. METHODS: GLS was retrospectively obtained in 332 patients with severe AS (aortic valve area indexed [AVAi] < 0.6 cm2/m2), no or mild symptoms, and LVEF ≥ 50%. Absolute values of GLS were collected. Survival analyses were carried out to study the impact of GLS magnitude on all-cause mortality. RESULTS: During a median follow-up period of 42 (37-46) months, 105 patients died. On multivariate analysis, and after adjustment of known clinical and/or echocardiographic predictors of outcome and aortic valve replacement as a time-dependent covariate, GLS magnitude ≤ 15% was independently associated with mortality during follow-up (all P < .01). Adding GLS magnitude ≤ 15% (adjusted hazard ratio = 1.99 [1.17-3.38], P = .011) to a multivariate model including clinical and echocardiographic variables of prognostic importance (aortic valve replacement, aortic valve area, LV stroke volume index < 30 mL/m2, and LVEF<60%) improved the predictive performance with improved global model fit, reclassification, and better discrimination. After propensity score matching (n = 196), increased risk of mortality persisted among patients with GLS magnitude ≤ 15% compared with those with GLS > 15% (hazard ratio = 2.10; 95% confidence interval, 1.20-3.68; P = .009). CONCLUSIONS: In this series of patients with severe AS, no or mild symptoms, and LVEF ≥ 50%, GLS obtained with vendor-independent speckle-tracking strain software was an effective tool to identify patients with a poor outcome. Detection of myocardial dysfunction by identifying GLS magnitude < 15% in patients with severe AS, no or mild symptoms, and LVEF ≥ 50%, can aid in risk assessment.