AbstractBackground:Pulmonary vein stenosis (PVS) is a condition with challenging treatment and leads to severe cardiac failure and pulmonary hypertension. Despite aggressive surgical or catheter-based intervention, the prognosis of PVS is unsatisfactory. This study aimed to assess the prognosis and to establish appropriate treatment strategies.Methods:We retrospectively reviewed endovascular treatments for PVS (2001–2017) from the clinical database at the Okayama University Hospital.Results:A total of 24 patients underwent PVS associated with total anomalous pulmonary venous connection and 7 patients underwent isolated congenital PVS. In total, 53 stenotic pulmonary veins were subjected to endovascular treatments; 40 of them were stented by hybrid (29) and percutaneous procedures (11) (bare-metal stent, n = 34; drug-eluting stent, n = 9). Stent size of hybrid stenting was larger than percutaneous stenting. Median follow-up duration from the onset of PVS was 24 months (4–134 months). Survival rate was 71 and 49% at 1 and 5 years, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between stent placement and survival; however, patients who underwent bare-metal stent implantation had statistically better survival than those who underwent drug-eluting stent implantation or balloon angioplasty. Early onset of stenosis, timing of stenting, and small vessel diameter of pulmonary vein before stenting were considered as risk factors for in-stent restenosis. Freedom from re-intervention was 50 and 26% at 1 and 2 years.Conclusions:To improve survival and stent patency, implantation of large stent is important. However, re-intervention after stenting is also significant to obtain good outcome.
Pulmonary vein stenosis or occlusion after catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: long-term comparison of drug-eluting versus large bare metal stents
