scholarly journals Carotid artery disease and periprocedural stroke risk after transcatheter aortic valve implantation

2017 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 145 ◽  
Author(s):  
ParthasarathyD Thirumala ◽  
Sruthi Muluk ◽  
Reshmi Udesh ◽  
Amol Mehta ◽  
John Schindler ◽  
...  
Vascular ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 102-104 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hüseyin Ayhan ◽  
Tahir Durmaz ◽  
Telat Keleş ◽  
Hacı Ahmet Kasapkara ◽  
Kemal Eşref Erdoğan ◽  
...  

One of the problems is valve embolization at the time of transcatheter aortic valve implantation, which is a rare but serious complication. In this case, we have shown balloon expandable aortic valve embolization TAVI which is a rare complication and we managed with second valve without surgery. Although there is not enough experience in the literature, embolized valve was re-positioned in the arch aorta between truncus brachiocephalicus and left common carotid artery.


2014 ◽  
Vol 64 (11) ◽  
pp. B206
Author(s):  
Giuseppe Ferrante ◽  
Paolo Pagnotta ◽  
Anna Sonia Petronio ◽  
Nedy Brambilla ◽  
Federico De Marco ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Muhammad Sabbah ◽  
Francis R. Joshi ◽  
Mikko Minkkinen ◽  
Lene Holmvang ◽  
Hans-Henrik Tilsted ◽  
...  

Background: Patients with severe aortic stenosis frequently have coexisting coronary artery disease. Invasive hyperemic and nonhyperemic pressure indices are used to assess coronary artery disease severity but have not been evaluated in the context of severe aortic stenosis. Methods: We compared lesion reclassification rates of fractional flow reserve (FFR) and resting full-cycle ratio (RFR) measured before and 6 months after transcatheter aortic valve implantation using the conventional clinical cutoffs of ≤0.80 for FFR and ≤0.89 for RFR. This was a substudy of the ongoing NOTION-3 trial (Third Nordic Aortic Valve Intervention). Two-dimensional quantitative coronary analysis was used to assess changes in angiographic lesion severity. Results: Forty patients were included contributing 50 lesions in which FFR was measured. In 32 patients (36 lesions), RFR was also measured. There was no significant change in diameter stenosis from baseline to follow-up, 49.8% (42.9%–57.1%) versus 52.3% (43.2%–57.8%), P =0.50. RFR improved significantly from 0.88 (0.83%–0.93) at baseline to 0.92 (0.83–0.95) at follow-up, P =0.003, whereas FFR remained unchanged, 0.84 (0.81–0.89) versus 0.86 (0.78–0.90), P =0.72. At baseline, 11 out of 50 (22%) lesions were FFR-positive, whereas 15 out of 50 (30%) were positive at follow-up, P =0.219. Corresponding numbers for RFR were 23 out of 36 (64%) at baseline and 12 out of 36 (33%) at follow-up, P =0.003. Conclusions: In patients with severe aortic stenosis, physiological assessment of coronary lesions with FFR before transcatheter aortic valve implantation leads to lower reclassification rate at 6-month follow-up, compared with RFR.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document