4.8 Article

Registry of Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Implantation in High-Risk Patients

期刊

NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE
卷 366, 期 18, 页码 1705-1715

出版社

MASSACHUSETTS MEDICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1114705

关键词

-

资金

  1. Edwards Lifesciences
  2. Medtronic

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Transcatheter aortic-valve implantation (TAVI) is an emerging intervention for the treatment of high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis and coexisting illnesses. We report the results of a prospective multicenter study of the French national transcatheter aortic-valve implantation registry, FRANCE 2. Methods All TAVIs performed in France, as listed in the FRANCE 2 registry, were prospectively included in the study. The primary end point was death from any cause. Results A total of 3195 patients were enrolled between January 2010 and October 2011 at 34 centers. The mean (+/- SD) age was 82.7 +/- 7.2 years; 49% of the patients were women. All patients were highly symptomatic and were at high surgical risk for aortic-valve replacement. Edwards SAPIEN and Medtronic CoreValve devices were implanted in 66.9% and 33.1% of patients, respectively. Approaches were either transarterial (transfemoral, 74.6%; subclavian, 5.8%; and other, 1.8%) or transapical (17.8%). The procedural success rate was 96.9%. Rates of death at 30 days and 1 year were 9.7% and 24.0%, respectively. At 1 year, the incidence of stroke was 4.1%, and the incidence of periprosthetic aortic regurgitation was 64.5%. In a multivariate model, a higher logistic risk score on the European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation (EuroSCORE), New York Heart Association functional class III or IV symptoms, the use of a transapical TAVI approach, and a higher amount of periprosthetic regurgitation were significantly associated with reduced survival. Conclusions This prospective registry study reflected real-life TAVI experience in high-risk elderly patients with aortic stenosis, in whom TAVI appeared to be a reasonable option. (Funded by Edwards Lifesciences and Medtronic.)

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据