Pāriet uz galveno navigāciju Pāriet uz meklēšanu Pāriet uz galveno saturu

Evaluating the quality of implantation of percutaneous ventricular restoration device (Parachute®) by cardiac computed tomography

  • Mohamad Amer Alaiti
  • , Anas Fares
  • , Andrejs Erglis
  • , Lemba Nshisso
  • , Kashif Shaikh
  • , Anthony E. DeCicco
  • , Marwan Nasif
  • , Ahmad Alkhalil
  • , Hüseyin Ince
  • , William T. Abraham
  • , Daniel I. Simon
  • , Marco A. Costa
  • , Guilherme F. Attizzani
  • , Hiram G. Bezerra*
  • *Šī darba korespondējošais autors
  • Case Western Reserve University
  • Paula Stradina Clinical University Hospital
  • University of Rostock
  • Ohio State University

Zinātniskās darbības rezultāts: Devums žurnālamZinātniskais raksts (žurnālā)koleģiāli recenzēts

2 Atsauces (Scopus)

Kopsavilkums

Background: The Parachute is a novel percutaneously implanted ventricular partitioning device (VPD) that has emerged as a safe and feasible treatment option for patients with heart failure following anterior wall myocardial infarction. VPD efficacy is likely dependent on optimal device placement, but to date there are no published data examining the effect of device positioning on patient outcomes. Methods and results: We retrospectively identified 32 patients successfully implanted with the Parachute device, all of whom underwent cardiac computed tomography (CCT) at baseline and after 6 months of follow-up. Patients were divided into two groups based on self-reported improvement in New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class: “not improved NYHA” (n = 12) and “improved NYHA” (n = 20). There were significant differences between both groups with regard to device positioning on follow-up CCT. Compared to patients with “improved NYHA,” patients with “not improved NYHA” had longer distances from device foot to left ventricular apex (8.0 ± 4.9 vs. 2.9 ± 4.6 mm; P = 0.01), and higher lateral angles (18.0 ± 14 vs. 9.1 ± 6.8 degrees; P = 0.02), respectively. There was no significant difference between the two groups in landing zone (45.4 ± 7. vs. 45.1 ± 6.9 mm; P = 0.92) and inferior angle (14.0 ± 11.9 vs. 14.3 ± 10.1 degrees; P = 0.95). There was a numerically larger malapposition area in the “not improved NYHA” group (5.1 ± 4.5 vs. 3.2 ± 2.2 cm2; P = 0.12). Conclusion: Quality of Parachute implant impacted clinical outcome, these findings should be applied prospectively in helping operators to achieve optimal implant.

OriģinālvalodaAngļu
Lapas (no-līdz)E104-E111
ŽurnālsCatheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions
Sējums89
Izdevuma numurs4
DOIs
Publikācijas statussPublicēts - 1 marts 2017
Ārēji publicēts

ANO IAM

Šis izpildes rezultāts palīdz sasniegt šādus ANO ilgtspējīgas attīstības mērķus (IAM)

  1. 3. IAM — Laba Veselība un Labbūtība
    3. IAM — Laba Veselība un Labbūtība

Nospiedums

Uzziniet vairāk par pētniecības tēmām “Evaluating the quality of implantation of percutaneous ventricular restoration device (Parachute®) by cardiac computed tomography”. Kopā tie veido unikālu nospiedumu.

Citēt šo