Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Background: A predictive model for Paravalvular aortic regurgitation (PAR) integrating the left ventricular outflow tract-to-ascending aorta angle (LVOT-AO) and depth to the non-coronary cusp (NCC) after TAVI with CoreValve prosthesis (MCP) was retrospectively identified (2 × ∠LVOT-AO + [depth to NCC-10]2; cutoff = 50). However, the validity and clinical utility of this model remain unknown.
Methods: A total of 100 patients (79.6 ± 7 years, mean EuroScore 24.9 ± 16.3%, 41 males) constituted a validation cohort for the predictive model. Both angle (LVOT-AO) and depth to NCC were considered during patient selection and device implantation.
Results: Significant AR occurred in 16% (group A) vs. 84% (group B). Angle ∠LVOT-AO and depth to NCC were larger in group A compared to group B (16.4 ± 7.2 vs. 11.8 ± 4.1, < 0.001, and 9.1 ± 4.8 mm vs. 6.6 ± 2.7 mm, = 0.004). The model showed a sensitivity of 68.7% and a specificity of 88.1% in prediction of PAR. Comparing the derivation cohort (initial experience, = 50) and validation cohort (later experience, = 100) it is showed that the ∠LVOT-AO, valve depth and PAR were significantly lower (12.5 ± 4.9 and 6.9 ± 3.2 mm vs. 19.7 ± 7.9 and 10.4 ± 3.7 mm, 40% vs. 16% respectively, all < 0.001) in the validation cohort.
Conclusion: The predictive model for significant PAR after TAVI using MCP is valid with a reassuring specificity and an acceptable sensitivity. A strategy incorporating these anatomical and procedural variables improves PAR after TAVI.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5883495 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ehj.2017.06.004 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!