Why the study?
Comprehensive analysis comparing surgical aortic valvuloplasty and balloon dilation in patients with congenital aortic valve stenosis is scarce and remains controversial.
Does surgical aortic valvuloplasty improve survival, reoperation rates, and hemodynamics compared to balloon dilation in children with congenital aortic stenosis?
Does surgical aortic valvuloplasty improve survival, reoperation rates, and hemodynamics compared to balloon dilation in children with congenital aortic stenosis?
In children with congenital aortic stenosis, surgical aortic valvuloplasty provides superior gradient reduction and freedom from reoperation compared to balloon dilation, though balloon dilation is a comparable option for infants under 3 months.
May support SAV preference after 3 months; leaves open randomized trials before practice change in congenital aortic stenosis.
BACKGROUND: For patients with congenital aortic valve stenosis (AVS), comprehensive analysis of surgical aortic valvuloplasty (SAV) or balloon dilation (BD) is scarce and remains controversial. METHODS: This study reviewed AVS data (aortic peak gradient, aortic insufficiency, and survival and reoperation) for patients who were suitable for biventricular repair at our center in 2008 to 2018. Patients were categorized into two subgroups based on age (≤3 or >3 months). CONCLUSION: Both methods achieved excellent survival outcomes at our center. SAV achieved superior gradient reduction and minimized the necessity for reoperation. For patients younger than 3 months, BD rivaled SAV both in aortic stenosis relief and freedom from reoperation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhu et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: