SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
vol.31 número1Edad mayor a sesenta años y tabaquismo son predictores de la presencia ecocardiográfica de placa aórtica complicada en pacientes con accidente cerebrovascular isquémico sin cardiopatía índice de autoresíndice de materiabúsqueda de artículos
Home Pagelista alfabética de revistas  

Revista chilena de cardiología

versión On-line ISSN 0718-8560

Resumen

MALUENDA, Gabriel et al. Percutaneous aortic balloon valvuloplasty as a bridge to aortic valve replacement in severe aortic stenosis. Rev Chil Cardiol [online]. 2012, vol.31, n.1, pp. 11-17. ISSN 0718-8560.  http://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0718-85602012000100001.

Background: the recent introduction of percutaneous aortic valve replacement (PAVR) has become a stimulus to perform percutaneous aortic balloon valvu-loplasty (PABV) in patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis (AS) as a bridge to valve replacement (AVR) Aim: to determine success rates and clinical results of PABV alone vs those obtained with PABV followed by either surgical or percutaneous AVR. Method: 472 patients with severe AS underwent a total of 538 PABV procedures. 378 (82%) were treated with PABV alone (Group I). In Group II, 85 patients (18%) had PABV followed by either PAVR (n=65) or surgical AVR (n=20). A successful PABV was defined as >40% reduction in mean aortic valve pressure gradient or >40% increase in aortic valve area Results: Groups I and II were comparable regarding age (81.7±8.3 vs. 83.2±10.9 years, p=0.18), STS score (13.1±6.2 vs. 12.4±6.4, p=0.4) and Logistic Euroscore (45.4±22.3 vs. 46.9±21.8, p=0.43). Mean increase in AVA was 0.39±0.25 cm2 in Group I and 0.42±0.26 cm2 in Group II (p=0.33). Mean aortic valve pressure gradient decreased 24.1±13.1 mmHg in Group I and 27 ±1.8 mmHg in Group II (p=0.06). PABV was not successful in 81 patients (15%). As expected, repeated PABV was the main predictor for failure (HR 4.34[95%, CI 2.2-8.3], p<0.001). Midterm mortality rate was 55.2% (214 patients) in Group I and 22.3% (19 patients) in Group II (p<0.001). Intra-pro-cedure mortality was identical in both Groups (2%). Stroke occurred in 2.3% of patients in Group I vs 1.6% in Group II. Conclusion: In high risk patients with severe AS and temporary contraindication for percutaneous or surgical AVR, PABV may be used as a bridge for intervention with good midterm results.

        · resumen en Español     · texto en Español     · pdf en Español