Literature DB >> 27532914

Effect of a Cerebral Protection Device on Brain Lesions Following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis: The CLEAN-TAVI Randomized Clinical Trial.

Stephan Haussig1, Norman Mangner1, Michael G Dwyer2, Lukas Lehmkuhl1, Christian Lücke1, Felix Woitek1, David M Holzhey1, Friedrich W Mohr3, Matthias Gutberlet1, Robert Zivadinov2, Gerhard Schuler1, Axel Linke3.   

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: Stroke remains a major predictor of mortality after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Cerebral protection devices might reduce brain injury as determined by diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DWMRI).
OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of a cerebral protection device on the number and volume of cerebral lesions in patients undergoing TAVI. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Investigator-initiated, single center, blinded, randomized clinical trial in higher-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing TAVI at the University of Leipzig Heart Center. Brain MRI was performed at baseline, 2 days, and 7 days after TAVI. Between April 2013 and June 2014, patients were randomly assigned to undergo TAVI with a cerebral protection device (filter group) or without a cerebral protection device (control group). The last 1-month follow-up occurred in July 2014.
INTERVENTIONS: TAVI with or without a cerebral protection device (filter system). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary end point was the numerical difference in new positive postprocedure DWMRI brain lesions at 2 days after TAVI in potentially protected territories. The first hierarchical secondary outcome was the difference in volume of new lesions after TAVI in potentially protected territories.
RESULTS: Among the 100 enrolled patients, mean (SD) age was 80.0 (5.1) years in the filter group (n = 50) and 79.1 (4.1) years in the control group (n = 50), and the mean (SD) procedural risk scores (logistic EuroScores) were 16.4% (10.0%) in the filter group and 14.5% (8.7%) in the control group. For the primary end point, the number of new lesions was lower in the filter group, 4.00 (interquartile range [IQR], 3.00-7.25) vs 10.00 (IQR, 6.75-17.00) in the control group (difference, 5.00 [IQR, 2.00-8.00]; P < .001). For the first hierarchical secondary end point, new lesion volume after TAVI was lower in the filter group (242 mm3 [95% CI, 159-353]) vs in the control group (527 mm3 [95% CI, 364-830]) (difference, 234 mm3 [95% CI, 91-406]; P = .001). Considering adverse events, 1 patient in the control group died prior to the 30-day visit. Life-threatening hemorrhages occurred in 1 patient in the filter group and 1 in the control group. Major vascular complications occurred in 5 patients in the filter group and 6 patients in the control group. One patient in the filter group and 5 in the control group had acute kidney injury, and 3 patients in the filter group had a thoracotomy. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing TAVI, the use of a cerebral protection device reduced the frequency of ischemic cerebral lesions in potentially protected regions. Larger studies are needed to assess the effect of cerebral protection device use on neurological and cognitive function after TAVI and to devise methods that will provide more complete coverage of the brain to prevent new lesions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01833052.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27532914     DOI: 10.1001/jama.2016.10302

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA        ISSN: 0098-7484            Impact factor:   56.272


  50 in total

Review 1.  Cerebral embolic protection devices during transcatheter aortic valve implantation: clinical versus silent embolism.

Authors:  Luis Nombela-Franco; German Armijo; Gabriela Tirado-Conte
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2018-11       Impact factor: 2.895

Review 2.  Transcatheter aortic valve implantation in Germany.

Authors:  Won-Keun Kim; Christian W Hamm
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2018-06-27       Impact factor: 5.460

3.  Rapid adoption of transcatheter aortic valve replacement in intermediate- and high-risk patients to treat severe aortic valve stenosis.

Authors:  Sigitas Cesna; Ole De Backer; Lars Søndergaard
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 2.895

Review 4.  Interventional treatment of the aortic valve : Current evidence.

Authors:  F Jansen; N Werner
Journal:  Herz       Date:  2017-09       Impact factor: 1.443

5.  Delayed Coronary Obstruction After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation is not the Structural Equivalent of Late Stent Thrombosis After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

Authors:  Simon Kennon
Journal:  Interv Cardiol       Date:  2018-05

Review 6.  Neurocognitive Function after Cardiac Surgery: From Phenotypes to Mechanisms.

Authors:  Miles Berger; Niccolò Terrando; S Kendall Smith; Jeffrey N Browndyke; Mark F Newman; Joseph P Mathew
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  2018-10       Impact factor: 7.892

7.  Antithrombotic therapy after transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a new piece of the still unresolved puzzle.

Authors:  Giuseppe Gargiulo; Marco Valgimigli
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2017-11       Impact factor: 2.895

Review 8.  Pros and cons of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI).

Authors:  Juan A Terré; Isaac George; Craig R Smith
Journal:  Ann Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2017-09

9.  Understanding Neurologic Complications Following TAVR.

Authors:  Ghare Mohammed Imran; Lansky Alexandra
Journal:  Interv Cardiol       Date:  2018-01

Review 10.  Cerebral protection devices for transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

Authors:  Hector Cubero-Gallego; Isaac Pascual; José Rozado; Ana Ayesta; Daniel Hernandez-Vaquero; Rocio Diaz; Alberto Alperi; Pablo Avanzas; Cesar Moris
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2019-10
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.