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










Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Open Heart ; 10(2)2023 09.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37666643

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Severe aortic stenosis is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. The existing treatment pathway for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) traditionally relies on tertiary Heart Valve Centre workup. However, this has been associated with delays to treatment, in breach of British Cardiovascular Intervention Society targets. A novel pathway with emphasis on comprehensive patient workup at a local centre, alongside close collaboration with a Heart Valve Centre, may help reduce the time to TAVI. METHODS: The centre performing local workup implemented a novel TAVI referral pathway. Data were collected retrospectively for all outpatients referred for consideration of TAVI to a Heart Valve Centre from November 2020 to November 2021. The main outcome of time to TAVI was calculated as the time from Heart Valve Centre referral to TAVI, or alternative intervention, expressed in days. For the centre performing local workup, referral was defined as the date of multidisciplinary team discussion. For this centre, a total pathway time from echocardiographic diagnosis to TAVI was also evaluated. A secondary outcome of the proportion of referrals proceeding to TAVI at the Heart Valve Centre was analysed. RESULTS: Mean±SD time from referral to TAVI was significantly lower at the centre performing local workup, when compared with centres with traditional referral pathways (32.4±64 to 126±257 days, p<0.00001). The total pathway time from echocardiographic diagnosis to TAVI for the centre performing local workup was 89.9±67.6 days, which was also significantly shorter than referral to TAVI time from all other centres (p<0.003). Centres without local workup had a significantly lower percentage of patients accepted for TAVI (49.5% vs 97.8%, p<0.00001). DISCUSSION: A novel TAVI pathway with emphasis on local workup within a non-surgical centre significantly reduced both the time to TAVI and rejection rates from a Heart Valve Centre. If adopted across the other centres, this approach may help improve access to TAVI.


Asunto(s)
Reemplazo de la Válvula Aórtica Transcatéter , Humanos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Reemplazo de la Válvula Aórtica Transcatéter/efectos adversos , Ecocardiografía , Pacientes Ambulatorios , Derivación y Consulta
2.
J Am Heart Assoc ; 12(11): e028038, 2023 06 06.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37232270

RESUMEN

Background No data currently exist comparing the contemporary iterations of balloon-expandable (BE) Edwards SAPIEN 3/Ultra and the self-expanding (SE) Medtronic Evolut PRO/R34 valves. The aim of the study was the comparison of these transcatheter heart valves with emphasis on patients with small aortic annulus. Methods and Results In this retrospective registry, periprocedural outcomes and midterm all-cause mortality were analyzed. A total of 1673 patients (917 SE versus 756 BE) were followed up for a median of 15 months. A total of 194 patients died (11.6%) during follow-up. SE and BE groups showed similar survival at 1 (92.6% versus 90.6%) and 3 (80.3% versus 85.2%) years (Plog-rank=0.136). Compared with the BE group, patients treated with the SE device had lower peak (16.3±8 mm Hg SE versus 21.9±8 mm Hg BE) and mean (8.8±5 mm Hg SE versus 11.5±5 mm Hg BE) gradients at discharge. Conversely, the BE group demonstrated lower rates of at least moderate paravalvular regurgitation postoperatively (5.6% versus 0.7% for SE and BE valves, respectively; P<0.001). In patients treated with small transcatheter heart valves (≤26 mm for SE and ≤23 mm for BE; N=284 for SE and N=260 for BE), survival was higher among patients treated with SE valves at both 1 (96.7% SE versus 92.1% BE) and 3 (91.8% SE versus 82.2% BE) years (Plog-rank=0.042). In propensity-matched patients treated with small transcatheter heart valve, there remained a trend for higher survival among the SE group at both 1 (97% SE versus 92.3% BE) and 3 years (91.8% SE versus 78.7% BE), Plog-rank=0.096). Conclusions Real-world comparison of the latest-generation SE and BE devices demonstrated similar survival up to 3 years' follow-up. In patients with small transcatheter heart valves, there may be a trend for improved survival among those treated with SE valves.


Asunto(s)
Estenosis de la Válvula Aórtica , Prótesis Valvulares Cardíacas , Reemplazo de la Válvula Aórtica Transcatéter , Humanos , Válvula Aórtica/diagnóstico por imagen , Válvula Aórtica/cirugía , Estudios Retrospectivos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Diseño de Prótesis
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...