Key result
Patients with LVEDD <4.0 cm undergoing balloon aortic valvuloplasty had higher intraprocedural complications compared to those with LVEDD ≥4.0 cm (32.3% vs 11.5%, P=0.01; adjusted OR 5.1).
Why the study?
Does small left ventricular size (LVEDD <4.0 cm) increase procedural and in-hospital complications in patients undergoing balloon aortic valvuloplasty?
Cohort (n=109)
No
Does small left ventricular size (LVEDD <4.0 cm) increase procedural and in-hospital complications in patients undergoing balloon aortic valvuloplasty?
Small left ventricular chamber size (LVEDD < 4.0 cm) is an independent predictor of significantly worse procedural and in-hospital outcomes in patients undergoing balloon aortic valvuloplasty.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Small LVEDD may warrant heightened procedural caution during BAV; leaves open prospective validation of size-specific risk stratification.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the impact of left ventricular (LV) chamber size on procedural and hospital outcomes of patients undergoing aortic valvuloplasty. BACKGROUND: Balloon aortic valvuloplasty (BAV) is used as an integral step during transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Patients with small, thickened ventricles are thought to have more complications during and following BAV. METHODS: Retrospective study of consecutive patients with severe, symptomatic calcific aortic stenosis who underwent retrograde BAV at Massachusetts General Hospital. We compared patients with left ventricular end-diastolic diameters (LVEDD) <4.0 cm (n = 31) to those with LVEDD ≥4.0 cm (n = 78). Baseline and procedural characteristics as well as clinical outcomes were compared. Multivariate logistic regression was used for the adjusted analysis. RESULTS: Patients with smaller LV chamber size were mostly women (80.7% vs. 19.4%, P < 0.01) and had a smaller body surface area (BSA), (1.61 ± 0.20 m(2) vs. 1.79 ± 0.25 m(2) , P < 0.01). Patients with smaller LV chamber size had higher ejection fractions and thicker ventricles. Otherwise, baseline characteristics were similar. The intraprocedural composite of death, cardiopulmonary arrest, intubation, hemodynamic collapse, and tamponade was higher for patients with LVEDD < 4.0 cm (32.3% v. 11.5%, P = 0.01). Adjusting for age, gender, BSA, LV pressure, and New York Heart Association class, LVEDD < 4.0 cm remained an independent predictor of procedural (OR 5.1, 95% CI 1.4-18.2) and in-hospital complications (OR 3.8, 95% CI 1.2-11.6). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to patients undergoing BAV with LVEDD ≥4.0 cm, those with smaller LV chambers had worse procedural and in-hospital outcomes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Don et al. (2012) conducted a cohort in severe, symptomatic calcific aortic stenosis (n=109). Left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD) <4.0 cm vs. LVEDD ≥4.0 cm was evaluated on Intraprocedural composite of death, cardiopulmonary arrest, intubation, hemodynamic collapse, and tamponade (OR 5.1, 95% CI 1.4-18.2, p=0.01). Patients with LVEDD <4.0 cm undergoing balloon aortic valvuloplasty had higher intraprocedural complications compared to those with LVEDD ≥4.0 cm (32.3% vs 11.5%, P=0.01; adjusted OR 5.1).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: