Literature DB >> 20975002

Comparison between transcatheter and surgical prosthetic valve implantation in patients with severe aortic stenosis and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction.

M A Clavel1, J G Webb, J Rodés-Cabau, J B Masson, E Dumont, R De Larochellière, D Doyle, S Bergeron, H Baumgartner, I G Burwash, J G Dumesnil, G Mundigler, R Moss, A Kempny, R Bagur, J Bergler-Klein, R Gurvitch, P Mathieu, P Pibarot.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Patients with severe aortic stenosis and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) have a poor prognosis with conservative therapy but a high operative mortality when treated surgically. Recently, transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has emerged as an alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for patients considered at high or prohibitive operative risk. The objective of this study was to compare TAVI and SAVR with respect to postoperative recovery of LVEF in patients with severe aortic stenosis and reduced LV systolic function. METHODS AND
RESULTS: Echocardiographic data were prospectively collected before and after the procedure in 200 patients undergoing SAVR and 83 patients undergoing TAVI for severe aortic stenosis (aortic valve area ≤1 cm(2)) with reduced LV systolic function (LVEF ≤50%). TAVI patients were significantly older (81±8 versus 70±10 years; P<0.0001) and had more comorbidities compared with SAVR patients. Despite similar baseline LVEF (34±11% versus 34±10%), TAVI patients had better recovery of LVEF compared with SAVR patients (ΔLVEF, 14±15% versus 7±11%; P=0.005). At the 1-year follow-up, 58% of TAVI patients had a normalization of LVEF (>50%) as opposed to 20% in the SAVR group. On multivariable analysis, female gender (P=0.004), lower LVEF at baseline (P=0.005), absence of atrial fibrillation (P=0.01), TAVI (P=0.007), and larger increase in aortic valve area after the procedure (P=0.01) were independently associated with better recovery of LVEF.
CONCLUSION: In patients with severe aortic stenosis and depressed LV systolic function, TAVI is associated with better LVEF recovery compared with SAVR. TAVI may provide an interesting alternative to SAVR in patients with depressed LV systolic function considered at high surgical risk.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20975002     DOI: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.109.929893

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Circulation        ISSN: 0009-7322            Impact factor:   29.690


  43 in total

1.  Interventional cardiology: TAVI--better than SAVR in high-risk patients?

Authors:  Katrina Ray
Journal:  Nat Rev Cardiol       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 32.419

2.  Invasive hemodynamic assessments during transcatheter aortic valve implantation: comparison of patient outcomes in higher vs. lower transvalvular gradients with respect to left ventricular ejection fraction.

Authors:  Jury Schewel; Dimitry Schewel; Christian Frerker; Peter Wohlmuth; Karl-Heinz Kuck; Ulrich Schäfer
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2015-07-16       Impact factor: 5.460

Review 3.  Prosthesis-patient mismatch: an update.

Authors:  Jean G Dumesnil; Philippe Pibarot
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 2.931

4.  Transcatheter aortic valve implantation: Current status and future perspectives.

Authors:  Pablo Salinas; Raul Moreno; Jose L Lopez-Sendon
Journal:  World J Cardiol       Date:  2011-06-26

Review 5.  Low-flow/low-gradient aortic stenosis-Still a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge.

Authors:  Anja Vogelgesang; Gerd Hasenfuss; Claudius Jacobshagen
Journal:  Clin Cardiol       Date:  2017-05-23       Impact factor: 2.882

Review 6.  TAVI 2012: state of the art.

Authors:  Jochen Reinöhl; Constantin von Zur Mühlen; Martin Moser; Stefan Sorg; Christoph Bode; Manfred Zehender
Journal:  J Thromb Thrombolysis       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 2.300

7.  Improvement of left ventricular longitudinal systolic function after transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a speckle-tracking prospective study.

Authors:  Flavio D'Ascenzi; Matteo Cameli; Alessandro Iadanza; Matteo Lisi; Valerio Zacà; Rosanna Reccia; Valeria Curci; Andrea Torrisi; Giuseppe Sinicropi; Carlo Pierli; Sergio Mondillo
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2012-12-28       Impact factor: 2.357

8.  Facts and principles learned at the 39th Annual Williamsburg Conference on Heart Disease.

Authors:  Mina M Benjamin; William C Roberts
Journal:  Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent)       Date:  2013-04

Review 9.  Emerging role of echocardiographic strain/strain rate imaging and twist in systolic function evaluation and operative procedure in patients with aortic stenosis.

Authors:  Bin Wang; Haiyan Chen; Xianhong Shu; Tao Hong; Hao Lai; Chunsheng Wang; Leilei Cheng
Journal:  Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg       Date:  2013-05-03

Review 10.  Low-gradient aortic stenosis.

Authors:  Marie-Annick Clavel; Julien Magne; Philippe Pibarot
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2016-03-31       Impact factor: 29.983

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.