A PHP Error was encountered

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

Prognosis and Management of Recurrent Stenosis After Pulmonary Vein Stenting: A Prospective Study. | LitMetric

Prognosis and Management of Recurrent Stenosis After Pulmonary Vein Stenting: A Prospective Study.

JACC Clin Electrophysiol

Department of Cardiology, Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China. Electronic address:

Published: November 2024

Background: Pulmonary vein stenting is effective for severe pulmonary vein stenosis, which is limited by restenosis. The assessment and management of in-stent restenosis (ISR) are inadequate, and follow-up outcomes after reintervention remain unknown.

Objectives: This study aimed to assess the prognosis and management of pulmonary vein ISR and determine whether the modified stent-in-stent strategy is superior to balloon angioplasty (BA) in treating ISR.

Methods: The authors conducted a prospective observational study on patients with severe pulmonary vein stenosis post radiofrequency ablation for atrial fibrillation.

Results: A total of 107 patients with 174 severely stenosed veins underwent successful stenting. Forty-three veins among 36 patients experienced ISR (24.7%, 43 of 174). Veins developing ISR had smaller diameter stents (7.8 ± 0.8 mm vs 9.2 ± 0.7 mm; P = 0.008). Restenosis veins were assigned to BA group or stent-in-stent group. Success rate was 95.7% for BA and 90.0% for stent-in-stent. Twelve veins experienced recurrent ISR, including 2 in stent-in-stent group (11.1%, 2 of 18) and 10 in BA group (45.5%, 10 of 22). The risk of recurrent stenosis was significantly lower in veins treated with the stent-in-stent method than with BA (HR: 0.21; 95% CI: 0.07-0.64; P = 0.02). Patients in the stent-in-stent group had greater exercise endurance and better World Health Organization cardiac functional class compared with BA group (F = 7.2; P < 0.05; and F = 4.4; P < 0.05, respectively) at 6- and 12-month follow-ups.

Conclusions: Our modified stent-in-stent implantation approach is superior to BA for treating pulmonary vein ISR, by reducing recurrent restenosis rate and improving exercise endurance.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jacep.2024.09.022DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

pulmonary vein
24
stent-in-stent group
12
prognosis management
8
recurrent stenosis
8
vein stenting
8
severe pulmonary
8
vein stenosis
8
vein isr
8
modified stent-in-stent
8
exercise endurance
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!