Home > Journals > Minerva Cardiology and Angiology > Past Issues > Articles online first > Minerva Cardioangiologica 2020 Dec 01

CURRENT ISSUE
 

JOURNAL TOOLS

eTOC
To subscribe PROMO
Submit an article
Recommend to your librarian
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Publication history
Reprints
Permissions
Cite this article as
Share

 

 

Minerva Cardioangiologica 2020 Dec 01

DOI: 10.23736/S0026-4725.20.05482-1

Copyright © 2020 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: English

Lambl’s excrescence in transcatheter aortic valve implantation: prevalence and risk of embolic events

Valeria CAMMALLERI 1 , Gaetano IDONE 1, Joseph COSMA 1, Maria M. MARINO 1, Agnese MAUCERI 1, Giuseppe STIFANO 1, Saverio MUSCOLI 1, Federica BOFFI 1, Francesca DE PERSIS 1, Pasquale DE VICO 2, Francesco VERSACI 3, Marco DI LUOZZO 1, Francesco ROMEO 1

1 Department of Cardiovascular Disease, Tor Vergata University, Rome, Italy; 2 Department of Anesthesia, Tor Vergata University, Rome, Italy; 3 Department of Cardiovascular Disease, S. Maria Goretti Hospital, Latina, Italy


PDF


BACKGROUND: The role of aortic valve Lambl’s excrescence (LEs) in determining ischemic events has not been well clarified, but they can represent a potential embolic source during procedures with catheter/device manipulation through the aortic valve. Aim
of our study was to assess the prevalence of LEs and the rate of embolism in patients with aortic valve stenosis scheduled for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI).
METHODS: Our population was divided into two groups, named LEs and no-LEs. In each group, the rate of cerebral embolic events was assessed, as well as other TAVI-related complications.
RESULTS: In our study population 28 patients (37%) had aortic strands and 48 (63%) did not have them. A cerebral protection device was used in 4 patients of LEs group (14% vs 0, p=0.03). The mean procedural time was similar in the two groups: 50±19 and 55±26 minutes (p=0.38) in LEs and no-LEs groups, respectively. The device success was achieved in 96% of LEs and 88% of no-LEs patients (p=0.37). Two patients of no-LEs group died during the procedure. Major complications were observed in both groups without any significant differences. Only one case of stroke occurred in the population without LEs (0 LEs vs 2% no-LEs, 0.78). No cases of peripheral embolism were observed.
CONCLUSIONS: In our population the observation of LEs is not uncommon. Despite the presumed high risk of embolism, we have not observed an increase in the rate of cerebral ischemic events or other TAVI related complications in patients with LEs.


KEY WORDS: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation; Stroke; Transesophageal echocardiogram; Cerebral protection device

top of page