Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2013 Oct 1;82(4):632-7.
doi: 10.1002/ccd.24682. Epub 2012 Nov 8.

Balloon aortic valvuloplasty for severe aortic stenosis as a bridge to transcatheter/surgical aortic valve replacement

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Balloon aortic valvuloplasty for severe aortic stenosis as a bridge to transcatheter/surgical aortic valve replacement

Itsik Ben-Dor et al. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. .

Abstract

Objectives: This study aimed to determine success- and complication rates after balloon aortic valvuloplasty (BAV) and the outcome of BAV as a standalone therapy versus BAV as a bridge to transcatheter/surgical aortic valve replacement (T/SAVR).

Background: The introduction of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has led to a revival in BAV as treatment for patients with severe aortic stenosis.

Methods: A cohort of 472 patients underwent 538 BAV procedures. The cohort was divided into two groups: BAV alone 387 (81.9%) and BAV as a bridge 85 (18.1%) to (n = 65, TAVR; n = 20, surgery). Clinical, hemodynamic, and follow-up mortality data were collected.

Results: There was no significant difference between the two groups in mean age (81.7 ± 8.3 vs. 83.2 ± 10.9 years, P = 0.18), society of thoracic surgeons score (13.1 ± 6.2 and 12.4 ± 6.4, P = 0.4), logistic EuroSCORE (45.4 ± 22.3 vs. 46.9 ± 21.8, P = 0.43), and other comorbidities. The mean increase in aortic valve area was 0.39 ± 0.25 in the BAV alone group and 0.42 ± 0.26 in the BAV as a bridge group, P = 0.33. The decrease in mean gradient was 24.1 ± 13.1 in the BAV alone group vs. 27.1 ± 13.8 in the BAV as a bridge group, P = 0.06. During a median follow up of 183 days [54-409], the mortality rate was 55.2% (n = 214) in the BAV alone group vs. 22.3% (n = 19) in the BAV as a bridge group during a median follow-up of 378 days [177-690], P < 0.001.

Conclusion: In high-risk patients with aortic stenosis and temporary contraindications to SAVR/TAVR, BAV may be used as a bridge to intervention with good mid-term outcomes.

Keywords: aortic stenosis; valve replacement; valvuloplasty.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

Similar articles

Cited by

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources