外科或经导管肺动脉瓣置换术,如何选择?

IF 18 Q4 Medicine
P. Normandin , A. Houeijeh , J.B. Baudelet , O. Domanskii , A. Delarue , S. Bichali , F. Juthier , F. Godart
{"title":"外科或经导管肺动脉瓣置换术,如何选择?","authors":"P. Normandin ,&nbsp;A. Houeijeh ,&nbsp;J.B. Baudelet ,&nbsp;O. Domanskii ,&nbsp;A. Delarue ,&nbsp;S. Bichali ,&nbsp;F. Juthier ,&nbsp;F. Godart","doi":"10.1016/j.acvdsp.2023.07.018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Pulmonary valve replacement<span> (PVR) is indicated for right ventricle outflow tract (RVOT) dysfunction. The choice between the transcatheter PVR (TPVR) and the surgical PVR (SPVR) is debated.</span></p></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><p>We aimed to compare the TPVR to the SPVR, considered previously as the gold standard, to determine the best choice for each patient.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A retrospective observational study was conducted in Lille University hospital. All patients who had PVR between January 2012 and May 2021 were included. The primary outcome was the incidence of valve failure defined as the occurrence of death, endocarditis or the need for secondary intervention.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>In total, 273 patients were included (100 patients with TPVR (36.6%) and 173 with SPVR (63.4%)). Age at the intervention was 25.1<!--> <!-->±<!--> <!-->14.8 years for TPVR and 34.9<!--> <!-->±<!--> <span>15.7 years for SPVR. The outlet malformation was the main pathology (65% of TPVR and 61.3% of SPVR) followed by the Ross intervention (18% of TPVR and 11.6% of SPVR). The mean duration of the follow-up was 3.6</span> <!-->±<!--> <!-->2,8 years for TPVR and 3.9<!--> <!-->±<!--> <!-->0,9 years for SPVR. Valve diameters were higher in the SPVR group (9%<!--> <!-->&lt;<!--> <!-->20<!--> <!-->mm – 44% 20–22<!--> <!-->mm and 47%<!--> <!-->&gt;<!--> <!-->22<!--> <!-->mm for TPVR; and 3.6%<!--> <!-->&lt;<!--> <!-->22<!--> <!-->mm and 96,4%<!--> <!-->&gt;<!--> <!-->22<!--> <!-->mm for SPVR) and post-intervention transvalvular gradient was higher in the TPVR group.</p><p>The primary outcome was not significantly different in TPVR than in SPVR (16.33% vs. 8.7% respectively, <em>P</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->0.846), and the freedom from primary outcome at 9 years of follow up was 57% in TPVR and 84% in SPVR (<span>Figure 1</span>), after adjusting for predefined confounders (age at the intervention, size of the valve, and disease).</p><p>The risks factors for primary outcome were number of previous surgeries (<em>P</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->0.0190) and small size of the valve (threshold<!--> <!-->&lt;<!--> <!-->22<!--> <!-->mm, hazard ratio 0.27, <em>P</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->0.0363).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion/Perspectives</h3><p>The choice between TPVR and SPVR should be individualized based on each patient, their risk factors and the size of their right ventricle outflow tract. A larger size of the valve (&gt;<!--> <!-->22<!--> <span>mm if possible) may be preferable mainly in patients with several previous surgeries.</span></p></div>","PeriodicalId":8140,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Cardiovascular Diseases Supplements","volume":"15 4","pages":"Pages 281-282"},"PeriodicalIF":18.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Surgical or transcatheter pulmonary valve replacement, how to choose ?\",\"authors\":\"P. Normandin ,&nbsp;A. Houeijeh ,&nbsp;J.B. Baudelet ,&nbsp;O. Domanskii ,&nbsp;A. Delarue ,&nbsp;S. Bichali ,&nbsp;F. Juthier ,&nbsp;F. Godart\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.acvdsp.2023.07.018\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Pulmonary valve replacement<span> (PVR) is indicated for right ventricle outflow tract (RVOT) dysfunction. The choice between the transcatheter PVR (TPVR) and the surgical PVR (SPVR) is debated.</span></p></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><p>We aimed to compare the TPVR to the SPVR, considered previously as the gold standard, to determine the best choice for each patient.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A retrospective observational study was conducted in Lille University hospital. All patients who had PVR between January 2012 and May 2021 were included. The primary outcome was the incidence of valve failure defined as the occurrence of death, endocarditis or the need for secondary intervention.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>In total, 273 patients were included (100 patients with TPVR (36.6%) and 173 with SPVR (63.4%)). Age at the intervention was 25.1<!--> <!-->±<!--> <!-->14.8 years for TPVR and 34.9<!--> <!-->±<!--> <span>15.7 years for SPVR. The outlet malformation was the main pathology (65% of TPVR and 61.3% of SPVR) followed by the Ross intervention (18% of TPVR and 11.6% of SPVR). The mean duration of the follow-up was 3.6</span> <!-->±<!--> <!-->2,8 years for TPVR and 3.9<!--> <!-->±<!--> <!-->0,9 years for SPVR. Valve diameters were higher in the SPVR group (9%<!--> <!-->&lt;<!--> <!-->20<!--> <!-->mm – 44% 20–22<!--> <!-->mm and 47%<!--> <!-->&gt;<!--> <!-->22<!--> <!-->mm for TPVR; and 3.6%<!--> <!-->&lt;<!--> <!-->22<!--> <!-->mm and 96,4%<!--> <!-->&gt;<!--> <!-->22<!--> <!-->mm for SPVR) and post-intervention transvalvular gradient was higher in the TPVR group.</p><p>The primary outcome was not significantly different in TPVR than in SPVR (16.33% vs. 8.7% respectively, <em>P</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->0.846), and the freedom from primary outcome at 9 years of follow up was 57% in TPVR and 84% in SPVR (<span>Figure 1</span>), after adjusting for predefined confounders (age at the intervention, size of the valve, and disease).</p><p>The risks factors for primary outcome were number of previous surgeries (<em>P</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->0.0190) and small size of the valve (threshold<!--> <!-->&lt;<!--> <!-->22<!--> <!-->mm, hazard ratio 0.27, <em>P</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->0.0363).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion/Perspectives</h3><p>The choice between TPVR and SPVR should be individualized based on each patient, their risk factors and the size of their right ventricle outflow tract. A larger size of the valve (&gt;<!--> <!-->22<!--> <span>mm if possible) may be preferable mainly in patients with several previous surgeries.</span></p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8140,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Archives of Cardiovascular Diseases Supplements\",\"volume\":\"15 4\",\"pages\":\"Pages 281-282\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":18.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Archives of Cardiovascular Diseases Supplements\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1878648023002392\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Cardiovascular Diseases Supplements","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1878648023002392","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

肺动脉瓣置换术(PVR)适用于右心室流出道功能障碍。经导管PVR (TPVR)和手术PVR (SPVR)的选择是有争议的。目的比较TPVR和SPVR(之前被认为是金标准),以确定每位患者的最佳选择。方法在美国里尔大学附属医院进行回顾性观察研究。所有在2012年1月至2021年5月期间患有PVR的患者均被纳入研究。主要结局是瓣膜衰竭的发生率,定义为死亡、心内膜炎或需要二次干预。结果共纳入273例患者,其中TPVR 100例(36.6%),SPVR 173例(63.4%)。干预时TPVR的年龄为25.1±14.8岁,SPVR的年龄为34.9±15.7岁。出口畸形是主要病理(65%的TPVR和61.3%的SPVR),其次是Ross干预(18%的TPVR和11.6%的SPVR)。TPVR的平均随访时间为3.6±2.8年,SPVR的平均随访时间为3.9±0.9年。SPVR组的瓣膜直径更高(9% <20毫米- 44% 20 - 22毫米和47% >TPVR 22mm;3.6% <22mm和96,4% >SPVR组为22 mm,干预后TPVR组的跨瓣梯度更高。TPVR和SPVR的主要结局无显著差异(分别为16.33%和8.7%,P = 0.846),在调整了预定混杂因素(干预时的年龄、瓣膜大小和疾病)后,TPVR和SPVR在9年随访时的主要结局自由度分别为57%和84%(图1)。影响主要结局的危险因素是既往手术次数(P = 0.0190)和瓣膜尺寸小(阈值<22 mm,风险比0.27,P = 0.0363)。结论/观点TPVR和SPVR的选择应根据每个患者、其危险因素和右心室流出道的大小进行个体化。较大尺寸的阀门(>22毫米(如果可能的话)可能主要适用于有过多次手术的患者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Surgical or transcatheter pulmonary valve replacement, how to choose ?

Introduction

Pulmonary valve replacement (PVR) is indicated for right ventricle outflow tract (RVOT) dysfunction. The choice between the transcatheter PVR (TPVR) and the surgical PVR (SPVR) is debated.

Objective

We aimed to compare the TPVR to the SPVR, considered previously as the gold standard, to determine the best choice for each patient.

Methods

A retrospective observational study was conducted in Lille University hospital. All patients who had PVR between January 2012 and May 2021 were included. The primary outcome was the incidence of valve failure defined as the occurrence of death, endocarditis or the need for secondary intervention.

Results

In total, 273 patients were included (100 patients with TPVR (36.6%) and 173 with SPVR (63.4%)). Age at the intervention was 25.1 ± 14.8 years for TPVR and 34.9 ± 15.7 years for SPVR. The outlet malformation was the main pathology (65% of TPVR and 61.3% of SPVR) followed by the Ross intervention (18% of TPVR and 11.6% of SPVR). The mean duration of the follow-up was 3.6 ± 2,8 years for TPVR and 3.9 ± 0,9 years for SPVR. Valve diameters were higher in the SPVR group (9% < 20 mm – 44% 20–22 mm and 47% > 22 mm for TPVR; and 3.6% < 22 mm and 96,4% > 22 mm for SPVR) and post-intervention transvalvular gradient was higher in the TPVR group.

The primary outcome was not significantly different in TPVR than in SPVR (16.33% vs. 8.7% respectively, P = 0.846), and the freedom from primary outcome at 9 years of follow up was 57% in TPVR and 84% in SPVR (Figure 1), after adjusting for predefined confounders (age at the intervention, size of the valve, and disease).

The risks factors for primary outcome were number of previous surgeries (P = 0.0190) and small size of the valve (threshold < 22 mm, hazard ratio 0.27, P = 0.0363).

Conclusion/Perspectives

The choice between TPVR and SPVR should be individualized based on each patient, their risk factors and the size of their right ventricle outflow tract. A larger size of the valve (> 22 mm if possible) may be preferable mainly in patients with several previous surgeries.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Archives of Cardiovascular Diseases Supplements
Archives of Cardiovascular Diseases Supplements CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
508
期刊介绍: Archives of Cardiovascular Diseases Supplements is the official journal of the French Society of Cardiology. The journal publishes original peer-reviewed clinical and research articles, epidemiological studies, new methodological clinical approaches, review articles, editorials, and Images in cardiovascular medicine. The topics covered include coronary artery and valve diseases, interventional and pediatric cardiology, cardiovascular surgery, cardiomyopathy and heart failure, arrhythmias and stimulation, cardiovascular imaging, vascular medicine and hypertension, epidemiology and risk factors, and large multicenter studies. Additionally, Archives of Cardiovascular Diseases also publishes abstracts of papers presented at the annual sessions of the Journées Européennes de la Société Française de Cardiologie and the guidelines edited by the French Society of Cardiology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信