Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
1.
Rev. bras. cir. cardiovasc ; 36(2): 150-157, Mar.-Apr. 2021. tab, graf
Article in English | LILACS | ID: biblio-1251090

ABSTRACT

Abstract Introduction: Aortic diseases are among the most serious cardiovascular diseases; the overall mortality rate due to diseases such as aneurysms and aortic dissections has been estimated at 2.78 per 100,000 persons in 2010, with a higher mortality rate in men than women. Our objective was to evaluate the epidemiological profile of patients with acute type A aortic dissection at a cardiology referral center. Methods: A retrospective cross-sectional study was performed at a public cardiac center with 24 patients hospitalized from 1/1/2016 to 12/31/2017 with a confirmed diagnosis of acute type A aortic dissection. Results: Twenty (83.3%) out of 24 patients underwent surgery and four (16.7%) did not undergo surgery. Among those who underwent surgery, 10 (50%) died and 10 (50%) were discharged, and all non-operated patients died (P=0.114) (Fisher's exact test). The male gender predominated (n=19, 79.2%), 86.7% (n=13) of the patients presented body mass index > 25 kg/m2, chest pain was found in 91.7% (n=22), and renal failure was present in 45.8% (n=11) of the cases. Hypertension predominated in 91.7% (n=22) and the main exam was aortic angiotomography in 79.2% (n=19) of the cases. Conclusion: The study presented a small sample size, making it impossible to associate the factors, although the service was considered a high-volume referral center. It is possible that the delay in arriving at the service and the accomplishment of invasive imaging with the use of contrast agents have aggravated the patients' condition and have been decisive for the increase in lethality, which requires further studies.


Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Aortic Aneurysm, Thoracic/surgery , Aortic Aneurysm, Thoracic/epidemiology , Aortic Dissection/surgery , Aortic Dissection/epidemiology , Aortic Dissection/diagnostic imaging , Brazil/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Retrospective Studies , Treatment Outcome
2.
Braz J Cardiovasc Surg ; 36(2): 150-157, 2021 04 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33438845

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Aortic diseases are among the most serious cardiovascular diseases; the overall mortality rate due to diseases such as aneurysms and aortic dissections has been estimated at 2.78 per 100,000 persons in 2010, with a higher mortality rate in men than women. Our objective was to evaluate the epidemiological profile of patients with acute type A aortic dissection at a cardiology referral center. METHODS: A retrospective cross-sectional study was performed at a public cardiac center with 24 patients hospitalized from 1/1/2016 to 12/31/2017 with a confirmed diagnosis of acute type A aortic dissection. RESULTS: Twenty (83.3%) out of 24 patients underwent surgery and four (16.7%) did not undergo surgery. Among those who underwent surgery, 10 (50%) died and 10 (50%) were discharged, and all non-operated patients died (P=0.114) (Fisher's exact test). The male gender predominated (n=19, 79.2%), 86.7% (n=13) of the patients presented body mass index > 25 kg/m2, chest pain was found in 91.7% (n=22), and renal failure was present in 45.8% (n=11) of the cases. Hypertension predominated in 91.7% (n=22) and the main exam was aortic angiotomography in 79.2% (n=19) of the cases. CONCLUSION: The study presented a small sample size, making it impossible to associate the factors, although the service was considered a high-volume referral center. It is possible that the delay in arriving at the service and the accomplishment of invasive imaging with the use of contrast agents have aggravated the patients' condition and have been decisive for the increase in lethality, which requires further studies.


Subject(s)
Aortic Aneurysm, Thoracic , Aortic Dissection , Aortic Dissection/diagnostic imaging , Aortic Dissection/epidemiology , Aortic Dissection/surgery , Aortic Aneurysm, Thoracic/epidemiology , Aortic Aneurysm, Thoracic/surgery , Brazil/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Retrospective Studies , Treatment Outcome
3.
Braz J Cardiovasc Surg ; 34(4): 396-405, 2019 08 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31454193

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether there is any difference on the results of patients treated with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the setting of ischemic heart failure (HF). METHODS: Databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register [CENTRAL/CCTR], ClinicalTrials.gov, Scientific Electronic Library Online [SciELO], Literatura Latino-americana e do Caribe em Ciências da Saúde [LILACS], and Google Scholar) were searched for studies published until February 2019. Main outcomes of interest were mortality, myocardial infarction, repeat revascularization, and stroke. RESULTS: The search yielded 5,775 studies for inclusion. Of these, 20 articles were analyzed, and their data were extracted. The total number of patients included was 54,173, and those underwent CABG (N=29,075) or PCI (N=25098). The hazard ratios (HRs) for mortality (HR 0.763; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.678-0.859; P<0.001), myocardial infarction (HR 0.481; 95% CI 0.365-0.633; P<0.001), and repeat revascularization (HR 0.321; 95% CI 0.241-0.428; P<0.001) were lower in the CABG group than in the PCI group. The HR for stroke showed no statistically significant difference between the groups (random effect model: HR 0.879; 95% CI 0.625-1.237; P=0.459). CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis found that CABG surgery remains the best option for patients with ischemic HF, without increase in the risk of stroke.


Subject(s)
Coronary Artery Bypass/mortality , Heart Failure/surgery , Myocardial Ischemia/surgery , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/mortality , Stroke/etiology , Aged , Brazil/epidemiology , Coronary Artery Bypass/adverse effects , Epidemiologic Methods , Evidence-Based Medicine , Female , Humans , Male , Meta-Analysis as Topic , Multicenter Studies as Topic , Myocardial Ischemia/mortality , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/adverse effects , Postoperative Complications/etiology , Postoperative Complications/mortality , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Review Literature as Topic , Stroke/mortality , Treatment Outcome
4.
Rev. bras. cir. cardiovasc ; 34(4): 396-405, July-Aug. 2019. tab, graf
Article in English | LILACS | ID: biblio-1020497

ABSTRACT

Abstract Objective: To evaluate whether there is any difference on the results of patients treated with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the setting of ischemic heart failure (HF). Methods: Databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register [CENTRAL/CCTR], ClinicalTrials.gov, Scientific Electronic Library Online [SciELO], Literatura Latino-americana e do Caribe em Ciências da Saúde [LILACS], and Google Scholar) were searched for studies published until February 2019. Main outcomes of interest were mortality, myocardial infarction, repeat revascularization, and stroke. Results: The search yielded 5,775 studies for inclusion. Of these, 20 articles were analyzed, and their data were extracted. The total number of patients included was 54,173, and those underwent CABG (N=29,075) or PCI (N=25098). The hazard ratios (HRs) for mortality (HR 0.763; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.678-0.859; P<0.001), myocardial infarction (HR 0.481; 95% CI 0.365-0.633; P<0.001), and repeat revascularization (HR 0.321; 95% CI 0.241-0.428; P<0.001) were lower in the CABG group than in the PCI group. The HR for stroke showed no statistically significant difference between the groups (random effect model: HR 0.879; 95% CI 0.625-1.237; P=0.459). Conclusion: This meta-analysis found that CABG surgery remains the best option for patients with ischemic HF, without increase in the risk of stroke.


Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Aged , Coronary Artery Bypass/mortality , Myocardial Ischemia/surgery , Stroke/etiology , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/mortality , Heart Failure/surgery , Postoperative Complications/etiology , Postoperative Complications/mortality , Brazil/epidemiology , Review Literature as Topic , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Meta-Analysis as Topic , Coronary Artery Bypass/adverse effects , Epidemiologic Methods , Multicenter Studies as Topic , Treatment Outcome , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Myocardial Ischemia/mortality , Evidence-Based Medicine , Stroke/mortality , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/adverse effects
5.
Braz J Cardiovasc Surg ; 34(3): 318-326, 2019 06 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31310471

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate the impact of prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) on the risk of early-term mortality after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). METHODS: Databases (Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online [MEDLINE], Excerpta Medica dataBASE [EMBASE], Cochrane Controlled Trials Register [CENTRAL/CCTR], ClinicalTrials.gov, Scientific Electronic Library Online [SciELO], Latin American and Caribbean Literature on Health Sciences [LILACS], and Google Scholar) were searched for studies published until February 2019. PPM after TAVI was defined as moderate if the indexed effective orifice area (iEOA) was between 0.85 cm2/m2 and 0.65 cm2/m2 and as severe if iEOA ≤ 0.65 cm2/m2. RESULTS: The search yielded 1,092 studies for inclusion. Of these, 18 articles were analyzed, and their data extracted. The total number of patients included who underwent TAVI was 71,106. The incidence of PPM after TAVI was 36.3% (25,846 with PPM and 45,260 without PPM). One-year mortality was not increased in patients with any PPM (odds ratio [OR] 1.021, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.979-1.065, P=0.338) neither in those with moderate PPM (OR 0.980, 95% CI 0.933-1.029, P=0.423). Severe PPM was separately associated with high risk (OR 1.109, 95% CI 1.041-1.181, P=0.001). CONCLUSION: The presence of severe PPM after TAVI increased early-term mortality. Although moderate PPM seemed harmless, the findings of this study cannot not rule out the possibility of it being detrimental, since there are other registries that did not address this issue yet.


Subject(s)
Heart Valve Prosthesis/adverse effects , Prosthesis Failure/adverse effects , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement/adverse effects , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement/mortality , Humans , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , Severity of Illness Index , Treatment Failure
6.
Rev. bras. cir. cardiovasc ; 34(3): 318-326, Jun. 2019. tab, graf
Article in English | LILACS | ID: biblio-1013462

ABSTRACT

Abstract Objectives: This study sought to evaluate the impact of prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) on the risk of early-term mortality after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Methods: Databases (Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online [MEDLINE], Excerpta Medica dataBASE [EMBASE], Cochrane Controlled Trials Register [CENTRAL/CCTR], ClinicalTrials.gov, Scientific Electronic Library Online [SciELO], Latin American and Caribbean Literature on Health Sciences [LILACS], and Google Scholar) were searched for studies published until February 2019. PPM after TAVI was defined as moderate if the indexed effective orifice area (iEOA) was between 0.85 cm2/m2 and 0.65 cm2/m2 and as severe if iEOA ≤ 0.65 cm2/m2. Results: The search yielded 1,092 studies for inclusion. Of these, 18 articles were analyzed, and their data extracted. The total number of patients included who underwent TAVI was 71,106. The incidence of PPM after TAVI was 36.3% (25,846 with PPM and 45,260 without PPM). One-year mortality was not increased in patients with any PPM (odds ratio [OR] 1.021, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.979-1.065, P=0.338) neither in those with moderate PPM (OR 0.980, 95% CI 0.933-1.029, P=0.423). Severe PPM was separately associated with high risk (OR 1.109, 95% CI 1.041-1.181, P=0.001). Conclusion: The presence of severe PPM after TAVI increased early-term mortality. Although moderate PPM seemed harmless, the findings of this study cannot not rule out the possibility of it being detrimental, since there are other registries that did not address this issue yet.


Subject(s)
Humans , Prosthesis Failure/adverse effects , Heart Valve Prosthesis/adverse effects , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement/adverse effects , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement/mortality , Severity of Illness Index , Risk Factors , Treatment Failure , Risk Assessment
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...