AIMS: Percutaneous aortic valve replacement (PAVR) is an emerging therapy for nonsurgical patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS). We investigated whether novel therapeutic approaches may facilitate AVR outcomes for high-risk patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: Eleven patients [n = 6 (54%) men] aged 82 +/- 10 years underwent PAVR after being refused for open surgery. The mean+/-SD AV area and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of these patients was 0.56 +/- 0.19 cm(2) and 49 +/- 17%, respectively, with severe functional limitation (NYHA class III (n = 8) and IV (n = 3)). One patient underwent PAVR combined with simultaneous percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Two male patients needed left iliac artery angioplasty. A percutaneous ventricular assist device (PVAD) was used in the most recent case. Compared with pre-PAVR, mean AV area (1.3 +/- 0.4 cm(2); P < 0.001) and LVEF (56 +/- 11%; P < 0.001) increased. One man had a peri-procedural stroke and died 5 days post-PAVR. Four other patients died within 4 months of hospital discharge. The median duration of survival of the survivors was 305 (range 249-431) days. CONCLUSIONS: Novel percutaneous techniques facilitate CoreValve PAVR (21 Fr.). Future lower profile devices (e.g. 18 Fr. Generation III CoreValve) should permit inclusion of a broader spectrum of high-risk patients. PAVR may evolve toward a full percutaneous approach. (c) 2007 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
AIMS: Percutaneous aortic valve replacement (PAVR) is an emerging therapy for nonsurgical patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS). We investigated whether novel therapeutic approaches may facilitate AVR outcomes for high-risk patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: Eleven patients [n = 6 (54%) men] aged 82 +/- 10 years underwent PAVR after being refused for open surgery. The mean+/-SD AV area and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of these patients was 0.56 +/- 0.19 cm(2) and 49 +/- 17%, respectively, with severe functional limitation (NYHA class III (n = 8) and IV (n = 3)). One patient underwent PAVR combined with simultaneous percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Two male patients needed left iliac artery angioplasty. A percutaneous ventricular assist device (PVAD) was used in the most recent case. Compared with pre-PAVR, mean AV area (1.3 +/- 0.4 cm(2); P < 0.001) and LVEF (56 +/- 11%; P < 0.001) increased. One man had a peri-procedural stroke and died 5 days post-PAVR. Four other patients died within 4 months of hospital discharge. The median duration of survival of the survivors was 305 (range 249-431) days. CONCLUSIONS: Novel percutaneous techniques facilitate CoreValve PAVR (21 Fr.). Future lower profile devices (e.g. 18 Fr. Generation III CoreValve) should permit inclusion of a broader spectrum of high-risk patients. PAVR may evolve toward a full percutaneous approach. (c) 2007 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
Authors: Robert M van der Boon; Rutger-Jan Nuis; Nicolas M Van Mieghem; Luc Jordaens; Josep Rodés-Cabau; Ron T van Domburg; Patrick W Serruys; Robert H Anderson; Peter P T de Jaegere Journal: Nat Rev Cardiol Date: 2012-05-01 Impact factor: 32.419