Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros











Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Cardiovasc Revasc Med ; 64: 7-14, 2024 Jul.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38448258

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Left atrial appendage (LAA) occluder embolization is an infrequent but serious complication. OBJECTIVES: We aim to describe timing, management and clinical outcomes of device embolization in a multi-center registry. METHODS: Patient characteristics, imaging findings and procedure and follow-up data were collected retrospectively. Device embolizations were categorized according to 1) timing 2) management and 3) clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Sixty-seven centers contributed data. Device embolization occurred in 108 patients. In 70.4 % of cases, it happened within the first 24 h of the procedure. The device was purposefully left in the LA and the aorta in two (1.9 %) patients, an initial percutaneous retrieval was attempted in 81 (75.0 %) and surgery without prior percutaneous retrieval attempt was performed in 23 (21.3 %) patients. Two patients died before a retrieval attempt could be made. In 28/81 (34.6 %) patients with an initial percutaneous retrieval attempt a second, additional attempt was performed, which was associated with a high mortality (death in patients with one attempt: 2.9 % vs. second attempt: 21.4 %, p < 0.001). The primary outcome (bailout surgery, cardiogenic shock, stroke, TIA, and/or death) occurred in 47 (43.5 %) patients. Other major complications related to device embolization occurred in 21 (19.4 %) patients. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of device embolizations after LAA closure occurs early. A percutaneous approach is often the preferred method for a first rescue attempt. Major adverse event rates, including death, are high particularly if the first retrieval attempt was unsuccessful. CONDENSED ABSTRACT: This dedicated multicenter registry examined timing, management, and clinical outcome of device embolization. Early embolization (70.4 %) was most frequent. As a first rescue attempt, percutaneous retrieval was preferred in 75.0 %, followed by surgical removal (21.3 %). In patients with a second retrieval attempt a higher mortality (death first attempt: 2.9 % vs. death second attempt: 24.1 %, p < 0.001) was observed. Mortality (10.2 %) and the major complication rate after device embolization were high.


Assuntos
Apêndice Atrial , Fibrilação Atrial , Cateterismo Cardíaco , Remoção de Dispositivo , Sistema de Registros , Humanos , Masculino , Apêndice Atrial/diagnóstico por imagem , Apêndice Atrial/fisiopatologia , Feminino , Idoso , Estudos Retrospectivos , Resultado do Tratamento , Fatores de Tempo , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Fatores de Risco , Cateterismo Cardíaco/efeitos adversos , Cateterismo Cardíaco/instrumentação , Cateterismo Cardíaco/mortalidade , Fibrilação Atrial/terapia , Fibrilação Atrial/mortalidade , Remoção de Dispositivo/efeitos adversos , Embolia/etiologia , Embolia/mortalidade , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Dispositivo para Oclusão Septal , Oclusão do Apêndice Atrial Esquerdo
2.
Am J Cardiol ; 156: 101-107, 2021 10 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34344509

RESUMO

There is a growing interest in transcutaneous aortic valve implantation (TAVI) therapy among patients with bicuspid severe aortic stenosis (BAV). Conduction disturbances remain a frequent complication of TAVI, and new-onset permanent LBBB (NOP-LBBB) post-TAVI may be a marker of worse outcomes. We aimed to evaluate the rate of NOP-LBBB following TAVI among patients with BAV as compared to tricuspid severe aortic stenosis (TAV). Patients enrolled in the multicenter (5 centers) Bicuspid AS TAVI Registry were reviewed and compared with patients with TAV. Patients with previous aortic valve replacement, other valve morphologies and those with preprocedural LBBB or pacemaker were excluded. NOP-LBBB was defined as LBBB first detected and persisting 30-days following TAVI. A total of 387 patients (66 with BAV, 321 with TAV), age 80.3 ± 7.3, 47% females were analyzed. The device success rates were 95% in both groups without any conversions to surgery. The rate of NOP-LBBB was significantly higher among patients with BAV versus TAV (29.2% vs 16.9%, p = 0.02). However, the rate of post procedural pacemaker implantation was similar (14.8% vs 12.5%; respectively, p = 0.62). In BAV and TAV groups, 1-year mortality (6.1% vs 7.2%; respectively, p = 0.75) and stroke rates (6.1% vs 3.5%; respectively, p = 0.30) were not significantly different. Multivariate analysis identified BAV as an independent predictor of NOP-LBBB (AdjOR = 2.7, 95%CI 1.3 to 5.4). Furthermore, BAV subtypes with raphe (type 1) were identified as independent predictors of NOP-LBBB (AdjOR = 3.2, 95%CI: 1.5 to 6.7). In conclusion, patients with BAV undergoing TAVI have greater risk for developing NOP-LBBB compared with patients with TAV and the presence of raphe was associated with increased risk of NOP-LBBB. The prognostic significance for this finding warrants further evaluation in future studies.


Assuntos
Estenose da Valva Aórtica/cirurgia , Valva Aórtica/cirurgia , Bloqueio de Ramo/epidemiologia , Eletrocardiografia , Sistema de Registros , Substituição da Valva Aórtica Transcateter/efeitos adversos , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Bloqueio de Ramo/etiologia , Bloqueio de Ramo/fisiopatologia , Feminino , Seguimentos , Humanos , Incidência , Israel/epidemiologia , Masculino , Estudos Retrospectivos , Taxa de Sobrevida/tendências , Resultado do Tratamento
3.
Am J Cardiol ; 123(4): 644-649, 2019 02 15.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30528420

RESUMO

Referral of low surgical risk (LSR) patients for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) becomes common in multiple tertiary centers, and clinical trial data for this population are not available to date. We performed a retrospective analysis on an Israeli multicenter registry. LSR and intermediate-high surgical risk (I-HSR) were defined by a Society of Thoracic Surgery score of <4% and ≥4%, respectively. The cohort included 2336 patients (LSR n = 1198, I-HLR n = 1138). As compared with LSR, patients with I-HSR were older and had significantly higher rates of baseline comorbidities. Although devices success rates (94% vs 96%), paravalvular leak (3.5% vs 5.2%), and permanent pacemaker implantation (17.2 vs 18%) were comparable (p >0.05 for all comparisons), the safety outcome at 1 month (12.7% vs 9.8%), procedural mortality (1.9% vs 0.6%), and mortality at 3 years (30.1% vs 16.1%) were higher in patients with I-HSR (p <0.05 for all comparisons). In a subanalysis of patients with very LSR, comparable rates of device success and safety outcomes were observed, whereas mortality at 1 to 3 years was lower. In conclusion, although procedural outcomes were comparable between LSR and I-HSR TAVI patients, the rates of short- and long-term mortality, as well as the safety outcome, were lower in LSR patients.


Assuntos
Estenose da Valva Aórtica/cirurgia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/epidemiologia , Substituição da Valva Aórtica Transcateter/efeitos adversos , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Estenose da Valva Aórtica/complicações , Estenose da Valva Aórtica/mortalidade , Feminino , Humanos , Israel , Masculino , Sistema de Registros , Estudos Retrospectivos , Medição de Risco , Fatores de Risco , Resultado do Tratamento
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA