Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 5 de 5
Filtrar
Más filtros











Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Clin Case Rep ; 12(3): e8653, 2024 Mar.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38464577

RESUMEN

Patent foramen ovale (PFO) is the most common interatrial septal abnormality. The indications for PFO device closure are still being evaluated, with the most common reason being to prevent cerebrovascular accidents (CVA) caused by paradoxical embolism of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in the lower extremities. This procedure is usually performed through percutaneous intervention using femoral vein access. Here, we present a case of PFO closure using a transhepatic approach, as femoral vein access was not feasible due to an interrupted inferior vena cava (IVC). The patient had a prominent left-sided IVC, larger than the right-sided IVC, and the left-sided IVC served as the main draining conduit via the hemiazygous system, which then connected to the azygous vein and emptied into the right atrium (RA). Cardiac MRI confirmed these findings, including the continuation of the suprahepatic IVC to the right atrium. With the assistance of interventional radiologist, transhepatic access was achieved, and the PFO was successfully closed. Hemostasis was achieved using coil embolization, and there were no post-procedural complications.

2.
World J Cardiol ; 15(11): 582-598, 2023 Nov 26.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38058399

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Conduction and rhythm abnormalities requiring permanent pacemakers (PPM) are short-term complications following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), and their clinical outcomes remain conflicting. Potential novel predictors of post-TAVR PPM, like QRS duration, QTc prolongation, and supraventricular arrhythmias, have been poorly studied. AIM: To evaluate the effects of baseline nonspecific interventricular conduction delay and supraventricular arrhythmia on post-TAVR PPM requirement and determine the impact of PPM implantation on clinical outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study that identified patients with TAVR between January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2019. The group was dichotomized into those with post-TAVR PPM and those without PPM. Both groups were followed for one year. RESULTS: Out of the 357 patients that met inclusion criteria, the mean age was 80 years, 188 (52.7%) were male, and 57 (16%) had a PPM implantation. Baseline demographics, valve type, and cardiovascular risk factors were similar except for type II diabetes mellitus (DM), which was more prevalent in the PPM cohort (59.6% vs 40.7%; P = 0.009). The PPM cohort had a significantly higher rate of pre-procedure right bundle branch block, prolonged QRS > 120 ms, prolonged QTc > 470 ms, and supraventricular arrhythmias. There was a consistently significant increase in the odds ratio (OR) of PPM implantation for every 20 ms increase in the QRS duration above 100 ms: QRS 101-120 [OR: 2.44; confidence intervals (CI): 1.14-5.25; P = 0.022], QRS 121-140 (OR: 3.25; CI: 1.32-7.98; P = 0.010), QRS 141-160 (OR: 6.98; CI: 3.10-15.61; P < 0.001). After model adjustment for baseline risk factors, the OR remained significant for type II DM (aOR: 2.16; CI: 1.18-3.94; P = 0.012), QRS > 120 (aOR: 2.18; CI: 1.02-4.66; P = 0.045) and marginally significant for supraventricular arrhythmias (aOR: 1.82; CI: 0.97-3.42; P = 0.062). The PPM cohort had a higher adjusted OR of heart failure (HF) hospitalization (aOR: 2.2; CI: 1.1-4.3; P = 0.022) and nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI) (aOR: 3.9; CI: 1.1-14; P = 0.031) without any difference in mortality (aOR: 1.1; CI: 0.5-2.7; P = 0.796) at one year. CONCLUSION: Pre-TAVR type II DM and QRS duration > 120, regardless of the presence of bundle branch blocks, are predictors of post-TAVR PPM. At 1-year post-TAVR, patients with PPM have higher odds of HF hospitalization and MI.

4.
Clin Med Res ; 19(1): 10-18, 2021 Mar.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33060110

RESUMEN

Background: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a rapidly evolving treatment for severe aortic stenosis. However, uncertainties exist for optimal valve selection as there are few long-term studies comparing patient survival by valve type.Objective: We hypothesized that self-expandable valves (SEV) would provide a survival advantage over balloon expandable valves (BEV), as SEV continue to expand and might better accommodate to the anatomy of the aortic valve over time.Methods: We examined outcomes according to valve type from a rural tertiary referral center between 2012 and 2017.Results: Out of 269 patients, 77 deaths (28.6%) occurred over the study period with 6 deaths by 1 month post-TAVR and 37 deaths by 1 year post-TAVR. The median observation time for survivors was 21.5 months. The probability of survival at 3 years was 60.7% and 61.9% for patients who underwent treatment with SEV and BEV, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in overall patient survival with or without adjustment for factors such as age, sex, race, and aortic valve area. Additionally, in a secondary analysis restricted to those patients treated in later years (2015-2017) survival among patients with BEV appeared superior (HR=0.456, P=0.015).Conclusion: Patients who underwent TAVR at a rural medical center with SEV showed similar survival compared to those who received a BEV. Superior survival was observed among those who received BEV versus SEV between 2015 and 2017.


Asunto(s)
Estenosis de la Válvula Aórtica , Prótesis Valvulares Cardíacas , Reemplazo de la Válvula Aórtica Transcatéter , Válvula Aórtica/cirugía , Estenosis de la Válvula Aórtica/cirugía , Humanos , Factores de Riesgo , Resultado del Tratamiento
5.
Clin Med Res ; 18(2-3): 89-94, 2020 08.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32580960

RESUMEN

Aspirin has demonstrated a clear benefit in secondary prevention of coronary syndrome, while aspirin's effect in primary prevention is unclear. This report will explore the role of aspirin as primary prevention for various vascular events. It strives to provide a clear guide for clinicians on whether or not to prescribe aspirin for their patients for primary prevention. Current guidelines and recent trials failed to show clear benefit against primary prevention, with risks outweighing benefits in moderate to high risk patients. A thoughtful discussion between patients and their doctors should be conducted before beginning aspirin use. More studies are needed to gain a better understanding of aspirin use in primary prevention.


Asunto(s)
Aspirina/uso terapéutico , Prevención Primaria , Enfermedades Cardiovasculares , Humanos , Factores de Riesgo
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA