Early Outcomes in Japanese Dialysis Patients Treated With Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation
Background:Although transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a new alternative treatment with acceptable midterm results for high surgical risk patients, at present performing the procedure in dialysis patients is not reimbursed in Japan.Methods and Results:The study group of 17 dialysis pa...
Saved in:
Published in: | Circulation Journal Vol. 79; no. 12; pp. 2713 - 2719 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Journal Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Japan
The Japanese Circulation Society
2015
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | Background:Although transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a new alternative treatment with acceptable midterm results for high surgical risk patients, at present performing the procedure in dialysis patients is not reimbursed in Japan.Methods and Results:The study group of 17 dialysis patients (mean age, 76.7±5.0 years) underwent TAVI with the SAPIEN/SAPIEN XT. EuroSCORE and STS score were 25.0±19.0% and 15.4±12.3%, respectively. Transiliofemoral and transapical approaches were performed in 7 (41.2%) and 10 patients (58.8%), respectively. ICU and hospital stays after TAVI were 1.8±1.6 and 12.9±12.7 days, respectively. Mean transvalvular gradients at discharge significantly decreased from 45.9±13.3 mmHg to 10.7±4.3 mmHg (P<0.0001) and effective orifice area significantly increased from 0.78±0.17 to 1.69±0.37 cm2(P<0.0001). Device success was 87.5%. One patient required a valve-in-valve procedure on 187-postoperative-day for an acute increase in paravalvular leakage caused by initial lower implantation of the device. The overall mortality at 1 year was 0% and clinical efficacies at 30 days, 6 months, and 1 year were 93.8%, 83.3%, and 69.2%, respectively.Conclusions:Satisfactory early results were achieved with TAVI in Japanese dialysis patients with a high surgical risk, indicating it is a safe and effective alternative for the treatment of aortic valve stenosis in such patients. (Circ J 2015; 79: 2713–2719) |
---|---|
Bibliography: | ObjectType-Article-2 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-1 content type line 23 |
ISSN: | 1346-9843 1347-4820 |
DOI: | 10.1253/circj.CJ-15-0829 |