Por favor, use este identificador para citar o enlazar este ítem: 10.1093/icvts/ivab175

Registro completo de metadatos
Campo DCValorLengua/Idioma
dc.contributor.authorArribas Leal, José M.-
dc.contributor.authorRivera Caravaca, José Miguel-
dc.contributor.authorAranda Domene, Ramón-
dc.contributor.authorMoreno Moreno, José A.-
dc.contributor.authorEspinosa García, Dolores-
dc.contributor.authorJiménez Aceituna, Antonio-
dc.contributor.authorPérez Andreu, Joaquín-
dc.contributor.authorTaboada Martín, Rubén-
dc.contributor.authorSaura Espín, Daniel R.-
dc.contributor.authorCánovas López, Sergio-
dc.date.accessioned2024-07-18T11:19:19Z-
dc.date.available2024-07-18T11:19:19Z-
dc.date.issued2021-06-28-
dc.identifier.citationInteractive CardioVascular and Thoracic Surgery, Volume 33, Issue 5, November 2021, Pages 695–701es
dc.identifier.issn1569-9293-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10201/143203-
dc.description.abstractOBJECTIVES The Edwards Intuity valve is a rapid deployment aortic prosthesis that favours less invasive approaches. However, evidence about the clinical behaviour of their smaller sizes is scarce. Herein, we studied haemodynamic behaviours and clinical outcomes of small Intuity prostheses (19–21 mm) in comparison to larger Intuity prostheses (>21 mm). METHODS This is an observational study including patients implanted with an Edwards Intuity rapid deployment aortic prosthesis. Patients with prosthesis sizes 19–21 and >21 mm were included. Baseline and perioperative variables, as well as adverse events during the follow-up were recorded and compared between groups. RESULTS A total of 122 patients (37% female, mean age 75 ± 4.5 years) were included, of whom 54 (45%) were implanted with a small prosthesis and 68 (55%) with a prosthesis >21 mm. There were no significant differences between patients with small Intuity prostheses and patients with larger prostheses regarding in-hospital mortality (2% vs 4%, P = 0.43) or mortality during the follow-up (3.41 vs 2.45 per 100 patients-years; P = 0.58). Survival in the small Intuity valve group was 95% at 1 year and 83% at 6 years, whereas in the larger Intuity valve group was 96% at 1 year and 78% at 6 years. The presence of a small prosthesis did not influence mid-term survival (log-rank P-value = 0.62). CONCLUSIONS This study showed good clinical performance of Intuity aortic prostheses with appropriate mid-term survival in patients with the small aortic annulus. Thus, the Edwards Intuity rapid deployment aortic prosthesis may be considered as a potential option in patients with the small aortic annulus.es
dc.formatapplication/pdfes
dc.format.extent7es
dc.languageenges
dc.relationSin financiación externa a la Universidades
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesses
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internacional*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/*
dc.subjectAortic stenosises
dc.subjectBiological prostheseses
dc.subjectRapid deployment aortic prostheseses
dc.subjectProsthesis–patient mismatches
dc.titleMid-term outcomes of rapid deployment aortic prostheses in patients with small aortic annuluses
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlees
dc.identifier.doi10.1093/icvts/ivab175-
Aparece en las colecciones:Artículos: Cirugía, Pediatría y Obstetricia y Ginecología

Ficheros en este ítem:
Fichero Descripción TamañoFormato 
ivab175.pdf710,27 kBAdobe PDFVisualizar/Abrir    Solicitar una copia


Este ítem está sujeto a una licencia Creative Commons Licencia Creative Commons Creative Commons