4.6 Article

Impact of Hemoglobin Drop, Bleeding Events, and Red Blood Cell Transfusions on Long-term Mortality in Patients Undergoing Transaortic Valve Implantation

期刊

CANADIAN JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY
卷 32, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.cjca.2015.10.032

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Despite the minimally invasive nature of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), the procedure is associated with several complications. We aimed to analyze the individual impact of bleeding events, hemoglobin (Hb) drop, and red blood cell (RBC) transfusions on prognosis and to evaluate the temporal trends in bleeding and RBC transfusions since the initiation of the TAVI program in our centre and onward. Methods: Consecutive patients (n = 597) undergoing transfemoral TAVI were prospectively enrolled. Periprocedural Hb levels, RBC transfusions, and major/life-threatening bleeding events were documented and analyzed. Results: In the entire cohort, mean Hb level decreased after TAVI (11.8 +/- 1.4 to 9.5 +/- 1.3 g/dL; P < 0.001). Major/life threatening bleeding occurred in 66 (10.1%) patients, and 179 (30%) patients received RBC transfusions. Major/life threatening bleeding was not independently associated with mortality when adjusted for Hb drop and RBC transfusion. Among patients with an Hb drop of < 3 g/dL, those who received RBC transfusions had a higher mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 1.9; confidence interval [CI], 95% CI, 1.2-2.9; P = 0.004). Among patients with an Hb drop of >= 3 g/dL, the Hb drop had no significant impact on survival (HR, 1.5; 95% CI, 0.7-2.9; P = 0.2); however, patients who received RBC transfusions had a significantly higher mortality (HR, 4.1; 95% CI, 2.2-7.7; P < 0.001). The use of RBC transfusions decreased gradually over the duration of the study. Conclusions: An Hb drop is frequently observed after TAVI. RBC transfusions are strongly associated with increased long-term mortality in these patients, regardless of the degree of Hb drop or major bleeding.

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

4.6
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