Balloon Aortic Valvuloplasty in Patients Admitted for Cardiogenic Shock with Severe Aortic Stenosis: A Retrospective Analysis of 14 Cases

摘要

Introduction Balloon aortic valvuloplasty (BAV), introduced in 1986, quickly lost its wide adoption due to the high incidence of restenosis after the procedure and?due to improved skills in transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). It has seen a re-emergence in the last few years as?bailout therapy in critical care patients presenting with cardiogenic shock (CS) and severe aortic stenosis (AS), who are temporarily unable to tolerate such a procedure as TAVI or surgery for valve replacement. Methods We did a retrospective analysis of every BAV performed between January 1, 2008, and November 11, 2018, in our hospital and identified those admitted to the cardiac intensive care unit (CICU) due to cardiogenic shock with severe aortic stenosis, as defined in the European Society of Cardiology Guidelines. Procedures were categorized as emergent (within 24h after the decision to intervene) and urgent (24h after the decision was made but before discharge). Results During this period, of 98 BAV performed, 14 were performed on patients with CS with severe AS, nine of them being emergent. The patients’ mean age was 76.2±7.2 years, with 6 (43%) of them being female. On the day of BAV, the mean Euroscore II and sequential organ failure (SOFA) were, respectively, 19±7% and 8.0±2.4 in emergent cases and 11±5% and 4.8±2.9 in urgent cases. In patients deemed emergent, there was a tendency for a decrease in SOFA in the days following the procedure, although not statistically significant (p0.05).?Clinically significant aortic regurgitation did not occur in any patient, neither were there any major post-procedure complications.?Thirty-day mortality was 33% in emergent cases and 0% in urgent cases. In emergent cases, four were later submitted to TAVI and one had surgery for aortic valve replacement surgery. Only one patient in the urgent group was regarded as a candidate for TAVI. Discussion and conclusion Emergent cases presented with higher scores of severity and procedure risk?and had?greater mortality. In this group, a greater proportion of survivors was later deemed fit for definite procedures. This highlights that presenting status does not seem to influence the prognosis of those extremely high-risk patients?once the acute event is promptly treated. Nevertheless, the low sample size precludes generalization of the findings. BAV as bailout treatment may be safe in patients presenting with CS and severe AS, allowing patient survival for elective definitive treatment.