RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Vascular complications increase morbidity and mortality in transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Data involving suture-based percutaneous vascular closure devices (VCDs) have been extensive. Although promising, data regarding the efficacy and safety of the MANTA VCD (Teleflex) are scarce. We sought to assess the safety and effectiveness of the MANTA device in a real-life unselected cohort of patients undergoing transfemoral-TAVR (TF-TAVR). METHODS: This single-center retrospective observational study included a cohort of consecutive patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) treated by our team using TAVR between January 2020 to December 2022. The primary outcome measure was access-related major and minor vascular complications according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC-3) definition criteria. RESULTS: From January 2020 to December 2022, a total of 347 patients underwent TF-TAVR were treated using the MANTA 18 Fr VCD system for vascular closure. Mean age was 82.4 ± 6.1 years (56-98 years). There were no significant differences in preoperative and procedural characteristics between patients with and without VCD-related major vascular complications. Access site-related major and minor vascular complications occurred in 20 of 347 patients (5.7%). Overall, major vascular complications occurred in 5 patients (1.4%) and device failure was seen in 17 patients (4.9%). CONCLUSION: This French real world evaluation of large-bore arteriotomy closure in TF-TAVR indicated that MANTA VCD is a feasible alternative with an acceptable low rate of access-site-related complications.
Assuntos
Cateterismo Periférico , Substituição da Valva Aórtica Transcateter , Dispositivos de Oclusão Vascular , Humanos , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Substituição da Valva Aórtica Transcateter/efeitos adversos , Resultado do Tratamento , Cateterismo Periférico/efeitos adversos , PunçõesRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Diabetes is associated with a high rate of events after acute coronary syndrome. It was recently reported that once-daily aspirin might not provide stable biological efficacy in patients with diabetes. AIMS: We sought to compare the biological efficacy of aspirin given once a day versus aspirin divided twice per day in a population of diabetic patients with non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) as assessed by the thrombin generation test. METHODS: We performed an open-label single-blind randomized study including 59 consecutive diabetic patients admitted for NSTE-ACS. Patients were randomly treated with aspirin 100 mg once a day (GA100; n = 20), aspirin 160 mg once a day (GA160; n = 19) or aspirin 100 mg twice a day (G2A100; n = 20). The primary endpoint was endogenous thrombin potential (ETP) at discharge and after 6 months. RESULTS: The mean age of our patients was 61.5 ± 9 years, and 73% were male. The baseline characteristics were comparable between the three groups. In the GA100 group, there was no significant effect on ETP variation at 6 months (1150.46 ± 504.84 vs. 1087.63 ± 454.18; p = 0.794). An increase in aspirin dose with a second daily administration of 100 mg was associated with a significant reduction in ETP at 6 months (1004.87 ± 196.2 vs. 1233.63 ± 333.5; p = 0.003). A nonsignificant decrease in ETP was seen in the GA160 group (from 1173.8 ± 388.07 to 1053.64 ± 269.93 at 6 months, p = 0.117). CONCLUSION: Only the twice-daily aspirin regimen led to better control of hypercoagulability in NSTE-ACS diabetic patients. However, no thrombin generation normalization was reported.