Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
Mais filtros











Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Braz J Cardiovasc Surg ; 39(4): e20230155, 2024 Jul 22.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39038084

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare hemodynamic performances and clinical outcomes of patients with small aortic annulus (SAA) who underwent aortic valve replacement by means of sutureless aortic valve replacement (SUAVR) or transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). METHODS: From 2015 to 2020, 622 consecutive patients with SAA underwent either SUAVR or TAVI. Through a 1:1 propensity score matching analysis, two homogeneous groups of 146 patients were formed. Primary endpoint: all cause-death at 36 months. Secondary endpoints: incidence of moderate to severe patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM) and incidence of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs). RESULTS: All-cause death at three years was higher in the TAVI group (SUAVR 12.2% vs. TAVI 21.0%, P=0.058). Perioperatively, comparable hemodynamic performances were recorded in terms of indexed effective orifice area (SUAVR 1.12 ± 0.23 cm2/m2 vs. TAVI 1.17 ± 0.28 cm2/m2, P=0.265), mean transvalvular gradients (SUAVR 12.9 ± 5.3 mmHg vs. TAVI 12.2 ± 6.2 mmHg, P=0.332), and moderate-to-severe PPM (SUAVR 4.1% vs. TAVI 8.9%, P=0.096). TAVI group showed a higher cumulative incidence of MACCEs at 36 months (SUAVR 18.1% vs. TAVI 32.6%, P<0.001). Pacemaker implantation (PMI) and perivalvular leak ≥ 2 were significantly higher in TAVI group and identified as independent predictors of mortality (PMI: hazard ratio [HR] 3.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.34-6.94, P=0.008; PPM: HR 2.72, 95% CI 1.25-5.94, P=0.012). CONCLUSION: In patients with SAA, SUAVR and TAVI showed comparable hemodynamic performances. Moreover, all-cause death and incidence of MACCEs at follow-up were significantly higher in TAVI group.


Assuntos
Estenose da Valva Aórtica , Valva Aórtica , Hemodinâmica , Pontuação de Propensão , Substituição da Valva Aórtica Transcateter , Humanos , Substituição da Valva Aórtica Transcateter/métodos , Substituição da Valva Aórtica Transcateter/mortalidade , Substituição da Valva Aórtica Transcateter/efeitos adversos , Masculino , Feminino , Hemodinâmica/fisiologia , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Valva Aórtica/cirurgia , Estenose da Valva Aórtica/cirurgia , Estenose da Valva Aórtica/mortalidade , Resultado do Tratamento , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos sem Sutura/métodos , Próteses Valvulares Cardíacas , Estudos Retrospectivos , Complicações Pós-Operatórias , Implante de Prótese de Valva Cardíaca/métodos , Fatores de Risco
2.
Trends Cardiovasc Med ; 34(3): 183-190, 2024 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36632858

RESUMO

Patients in hemodialysis with an arm arteriovenous fistula undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) with an internal thoracic artery have been reported to suffer from coronary-subclavian steal (CSS) during dialysis session. However, its occurrence is still debated. A systematic literature review was performed to identify all studies investigating the occurrence of a CSS event in this subset of patients. The primary endpoint was the analysis of CSS and the following early and late survival outcomes. Independent determinants of CSS and the impact of the distance between the arteriovenous fistula (upper arm vs forearm) and the ipsilateral internal thoracic artery graft on CSS events and mortality were studied. Early and late survival outcomes were analyzed by comparing ipsilateral versus contralateral arteriovenous fistula. Of the 1,383 retrieved articles, 10 were included (n = 643 patients). The pooled event rate of CSS was 6.46% [95%CI=2.10-18.15], while of symptomatic CSS incidence was 3.99% [95%CI=0.95-15.25]. No survival differences were noted when comparing ipsilateral to contralateral arteriovenous fistula-internal thoracic artery combinations. On meta-regression, the upper arm was associated with more CSS events, while the forearm to lower late mortality rates. Independently from arteriovenous fistula-internal thoracic artery combination, CSS was not associated to higher mortality rates. Particular attention is warranted when selecting the type of conduits for CABG in patients with an arteriovenous fistula or if highly expected to need one in the near future after surgery. A contralateral arteriovenous fistula-internal thoracic artery combination is preferable. If this is not possible, a forearm arteriovenous fistula position should be preferred.

3.
Rev. bras. cir. cardiovasc ; 39(4): e20230155, 2024. tab, graf
Artigo em Inglês | LILACS-Express | LILACS | ID: biblio-1569616

RESUMO

ABSTRACT Objective: This study aimed to compare hemodynamic performances and clinical outcomes of patients with small aortic annulus (SAA) who underwent aortic valve replacement by means of sutureless aortic valve replacement (SUAVR) or transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Methods: From 2015 to 2020, 622 consecutive patients with SAA underwent either SUAVR or TAVI. Through a 1:1 propensity score matching analysis, two homogeneous groups of 146 patients were formed. Primary endpoint: all cause-death at 36 months. Secondary endpoints: incidence of moderate to severe patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM) and incidence of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs) Results: All-cause death at three years was higher in the TAVI group (SUAVR 12.2% vs. TAVI 21.0%, P=0.058). Perioperatively, comparable hemodynamic performances were recorded in terms of indexed effective orifice area (SUAVR 1.12 ± 0.23 cm2/m2 vs. TAVI 1.17 ± 0.28 cm2/m2, P=0.265), mean transvalvular gradients (SUAVR 12.9 ± 5.3 mmHg vs. TAVI 12.2 ± 6.2 mmHg, P=0.332), and moderate-to-severe PPM (SUAVR 4.1% vs. TAVI 8.9%, P=0.096). TAVI group showed a higher cumulative incidence of MACCEs at 36 months (SUAVR 18.1% vs. TAVI 32.6%, P<0.001). Pacemaker implantation (PMI) and perivalvular leak ≥ 2 were significantly higher in TAVI group and identified as independent predictors of mortality (PMI: hazard ratio [HR] 3.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.34-6.94, P=0.008; PPM: HR 2.72, 95% CI 1.25-5.94, P=0.012). Conclusion: In patients with SAA, SUAVR and TAVI showed comparable hemodynamic performances. Moreover, all-cause death and incidence of MACCEs at follow-up were significantly higher in TAVI group.

4.
Thorac Cardiovasc Surg ; 67(8): 644-651, 2019 Dec.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30114715

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The Freedom SOLO (FS) stentless bovine-pericardial prosthesis with a supra-annular implantation technique can be a viable option for patients with endocarditic annular destruction. We assessed early- and long-term outcomes following the use of this prosthesis in extensive aortic valve endocarditis. METHODS: From 2006 to 2016, 59 patients with extensive aortic endocarditis underwent aortic valve replacement (AVR) with FS (cumulative follow-up 263 patients-years) in three European centers; all patients presented annular tissue infection, while 54.3% of patients had annular abscess. RESULTS: Mean age was 66 ± 11 years and mean EuroSCORE I was 30.3% (standard deviation: 24.1%). In our series, 30.5% of patients had prosthetic valve endocarditis. Early mortality was 15.2% (nine patients). Estimated overall survival at 5 and 10 years was 68.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 62.8-75.0%) and 59.1% (95% CI: 66.8-81.2%), respectively. At 10-year survival, freedom from valve-related death was 83.7% (95% CI: 80.9-86.5%). No structural valve deterioration was reported in this series. Five patients (8.5%) had recurrent endocarditis during follow-up and two of them underwent reoperation. Survival freedom from reoperation and endocarditis at 10-year follow-up was 88.0% (CI: 80.4-95.6%) and 86.7% (CI: 80.5-92.9%), respectively. CONCLUSION: FS stentless bioprosthesis is a valuable and simple option to achieve AVR in patients with extensive aortic annulus endocarditis. Although in this group of complex patients, early mortality remains considerably high, late survival outcomes are comparable to the more technically demanding homografts and conventional stentless bioprostheses, with low rates of endocarditis recurrence.


Assuntos
Valva Aórtica/cirurgia , Bioprótese , Endocardite/terapia , Implante de Prótese de Valva Cardíaca/instrumentação , Próteses Valvulares Cardíacas , Idoso , Valva Aórtica/fisiopatologia , Endocardite/diagnóstico , Endocardite/mortalidade , Endocardite/fisiopatologia , Europa (Continente) , Feminino , Alemanha , Implante de Prótese de Valva Cardíaca/efeitos adversos , Implante de Prótese de Valva Cardíaca/mortalidade , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/mortalidade , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/cirurgia , Intervalo Livre de Progressão , Desenho de Prótese , Recuperação de Função Fisiológica , Recidiva , Reoperação , Estudos Retrospectivos , Fatores de Risco , Fatores de Tempo
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA