These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Early Clinical Outcomes of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Left Ventricular Outflow Tract Calcification: New-Generation Device vs Early-Generation Device.
    Author: Nomura T, Maeno Y, Yoon SH, Abramowitz Y, Israr S, Miyasaka M, Kazuno Y, Takahashi N, Kawamori H, Nakamura M, Jilaihawi H, Makkar RR.
    Journal: J Invasive Cardiol; 2018 Nov; 30(11):421-427. PubMed ID: 30373952.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in cases with left ventricular outflow tract calcification (LVOT-CA) remains a challenging procedure. The aim of this study was to compare the early outcomes of patients undergoing TAVR in LVOT-CA with new-generation devices vs early-generation devices. METHODS: Between January 2014 and December 2016, a total of 433 patients with severe aortic stenosis who had a preprocedural multidetector computed tomography underwent TAVR in a LVOT-CA. After propensity matching, data from 119 patients in each group were analyzed. TAVR endpoints and adverse events were defined according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium-2. RESULTS: Compared with early-generation devices (Edwards Sapien/Sapien XT/CoreValve), new-generation devices (Sapien 3/Evolut R) had significantly lower incidence of mild-moderate paravalvular leak (PVL) (1.7% new vs 7.6% early; P=.03), tended to have lower incidence of moderate or severe PVL (5.0% new vs 11.8% early; P=.06), had no significant difference in device success (89.1% new vs 83.2% early; P=.19), and had a significantly higher early safety rate at 30 days (93.3% new vs 84.9% early; P=.04). For cardiac conduction disturbances, new-generation and early-generation devices had similarly high rates of new permanent pacemaker implantation (16.8% new vs 15.1% early; P=.72), whereas the number of patients who developed new-onset left bundle-branch block (LBBB) were significantly higher in those with new-generation devices (16.0% new vs 6.7% early; P=.03). CONCLUSION: In the setting of LVOT-CA, patients with new-generation devices compared to those with early-generation devices had acceptable clinical outcomes except for cardiac conduction disturbances, especially in new-onset LBBB.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]