ABSTRACT
O pseudoaneurisma da zona fibrosa intervalvar mitroaórtica (PFMA) é uma doença pouco frequente, em geral secundária a endocardite da valva aórtica, particularmente em próteses valvares. Seu curso clínico é variável e pode ocasionar complicações graves, como ruptura para o pericárdio, aorta ou átrio esquerdo, compressão sistólica das artérias coronárias ou compressão sistólica da valva mitral, ocasionando regurgitação mitral acentuada, motivo pelo qual se recomenda seu tratamento cirúrgico. Neste relato é apresentado o caso de paciente com 69 anos de idade, assintomático, com antecedente de duas cirurgias de revascularização miocárdica, a última associada a troca valvar aórtica. O PFMA foi diagnosticado incidentalmente na evolução pós-operatória tardia, optando-se pelo tratamento percutâneo com a prótese AmplatzerTM Muscular VSD Occluder.
Pseudoaneurysm of the mitral-aortic intervalvular fibrosa (PMAF) is a rare disease, usually secondary to aortic valve endocarditis, particularly in prosthetic valves. Its clinical course is variable and may potentially cause serious complications, such as rupture into the pericardium, aorta or left atrium, systolic compression of the coronary arteries or systolic compression of the mitral valve, leading to severe mitral regurgitation, for which surgical treatment is recommended. This is a case report of a 69 year-old asymptomatic patient, with a prior history of two coronary artery bypass graft surgeries, the latter associated with aortic valve replacement. The PMAF was incidentally diagnosed in the late follow-up, and a decision was made to perform percutaneous therapy with the AmplatzerTM Muscular VSD Occluder.
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Aged , Aneurysm, False/complications , Aneurysm, False/diagnosis , Heart Valve Prosthesis , Aortic Valve/surgery , Endocarditis, Bacterial/complicationsABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE - This analysis was undertaken to determine the composite incidence of cumulative adverse events (death, reinfarction, disabling stroke, and target vessel revascularization) at the end of the first year after acute myocardial infarction, in diabetic patients who underwent coronary stenting or primary coronary balloon angioplasty. METHODS - From the STENT PAMI trial, we analyzed the 6-month angiographic and 1-year clinical outcomes of 135 diabetic (112, noninsulin dependent) patients who underwent the randomization process of the trial and compared them with 758 nondiabetic patients. RESULTS - Coronary stenting did not significantly reduce the primary composite clinical end point when compared with PTCA (20 vs. 30 percent, p=0.2). A significant benefit from stenting was observed in patients with noninsulin dependent diabetes, with a trend toward a lesser need for new revascularization procedures (10 vs. 21 percent, p<.001), with a significant reduction in the primary composite clinical end point at 1 year (12 vs. 28 percent, p=. 04). At 6 months, the restenosis rate were significantly reduced only in nondiabetic patients (18 vs. 33 percent, p<. 001). Diabetic patients had the same restenosis rate (38 percent) either with stenting or balloon PTCA. CONCLUSIONS - Coronary Stenting in diabetics noninsulin dependent offered a significant reduction in the composite incidence of major clinical adverse events compared with balloon PTCA
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Middle Aged , Stents , Diabetic Angiopathies/therapy , Angioplasty, Balloon, Coronary , Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Cross-Sectional Studies , Follow-Up Studies , Treatment Outcome , Coronary Angiography , Diabetic Angiopathies , Chi-Square Distribution , Myocardial InfarctionABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcome of balloon PTCA with final coronary stenosis diameter (SD) <=30 percent, with elective coronary stenting. METHODS: We performed a comparative analysis of the 6 month outcomes in patients treated with primary stenting and those who obtained an optimal balloon PTCA result treated during the first 12 hours of AMI onset included in the STENT PAMI randomized trial. RESULTS: The results were analysed into 3 groups: primary stenting (441 patients, SD=22 + or - 6 percent), optimal PTCA (245 patients), and nonoptimal PTCA (182 patients, SD= 37 + or - 5 percent). At the end of the 6 months primary stent group presented with the lowest restenosis(23 vs. 31 vs. 45 percent, p=0.001, respectively). Ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization rate (TVR) (7 vs. 15.5 vs. 19 percent, p=0.001, respectively). CONCLUSION: At the 6 month follow-up, primary stenting offered the lowest restenosis and ischemia-driven TVR rates. Compared to optimal balloon PTCA. Nonoptimal primary balloon PTCA pts (SD=31-50 percent), had the worst late angiographic outcomes and should be treated more actively with coronary stent implantation