LUCAS LACERDA ARAUJO
Projetos de Pesquisa
Unidades Organizacionais
3 resultados
Resultados de Busca
Agora exibindo 1 - 3 de 3
- Thrombocytopenia After Transcatheter Valve-in-Valve Implantation: Prognostic Marker or Mere Finding?(2018) SOUZA, Renato C. de; PAIM, Leonardo; VIOTTO, Guilherme; APRIGIO, Joaquim; ARAUJO, Lucas L.; RIBEIRO, Henrique; SAMPAIO, Roney O.; TARASOUTCHI, Flavio; POMERANTZEFF, Pablo M. A.; PALMA, Jose Honorio; JATENE, Fabio B.Objective: To analyze the behavior of platelets after transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation for the treatment of degenerated bioprosthesis and how they correlate with adverse events upon follow-up. Methods: Retrospective analysis of 28 patients who received a valve-in-valve implant, 5 in aortic, 18 in mitral and 5 in tricuspid positions. Data were compared with 74 patients submitted to conventional redo valvular replacements during the same period, and both groups' platelet curves were analyzed. Statistical analysis was conducted using the IBM SPSS Statistics (R) 20 for Windows. Results: All patients in the valve-in-valve group developed thrombocytopenia, 25% presenting mild (<150.000/mu L), 54% moderate (<100.000/mu L) and 21% severe (<50.000/mu L) thrombocytopenia. The platelet nadir was on the 4th postoperative day for aortic ViV, 2nd for mitral and 3rd for tricuspid patients, with the majority of patients recovering regular platelet count. However, the aortic subgroup comparison between valve-invalve and conventional surgery showed a statistically significant difference from the 7th day onwards, where valve-in-valve patients had more severe and longer lasting thrombocytopenia. This, however, did not translate into a higher postoperative risk. In our study population, postoperative thrombocytopenia did not correlate with greater occurrence of adverse outcomes and only normal preoperative platelet count could significantly predict a postoperative drop >50%. Conclusion: Although thrombocytopenia is an extremely common finding after valve-in-valve procedures, the degree of platelet count drop did not correlate with greater incidence of postoperative adverse outcomes in our study population.
- Does aortic valve repair in valve-sparing aortic root reconstruction compromise the longevity of the procedure?(2017) DIAS, Ricardo Ribeiro; DUNCAN, Jose Augusto; DINATO, Fabricio Jose de Souza; ARAUJO, Lucas Lacerda; ISSA, Hugo Monteiro Neder; FERNANDES, Fabio; MADY, Charles; JATENE, Fabio BiscegliOBJECTIVES: The effect of performing aortic valve repair in combination with valve-sparing operation on the length of time for which patients are free from reoperation is unclear. The objective of this study was to determine if the performance of aortic valve repair during valve-sparing operation modified the freedom from reoperation time. METHODS: From January 2003 to July 2014, 78 patients with a mean age of 49 +/- 15 years underwent valve-sparing operation. Sixty-eight percent of these patients were male. Twenty-two (28%) aortic valve repair procedures were performed in this patient population. In the aortic valve repair + valve-sparing operation group, 77.3% of patients had moderate/severe aortic insufficiency, while in the valve-sparing operation group, 58.6% of patients had moderate/severe aortic insufficiency (ns = not significant). Additionally, 13.6% of patients in the aortic valve repair + valve-sparing operation group had functional class III/IV, while 14.2% of patients in the valve-sparing operation group had functional class III/IV (ns). RESULTS: The in-hospital and late mortality rates, for the aortic valve repair + valve-sparing operation and valve-sparing operation groups were similar, as they were 4.5% and 3.6%; and 0% and 1.8%, respectively. In the aortic valve repair + valve-sparing operation group, 0% of patients presented moderate/severe aortic insufficiency during late follow-up, while in the valve-sparing operation group, 14.2% of patients presented with moderate/severe aortic insufficiency during this period (ns). In the aortic valve repair + valve-sparing operation group, 5.3% of patients presented with functional class III/IV, while in the valve-sparing operation group, 4.2% of patients presented with functional class III/IV (ns). In the aortic valve repair + valve-sparing operation group, 0% of patients required reoperation, while in the valve-sparing operation group, 3.6% of patients required reoperation over a mean follow-up period of 1621 +/- 1156 days (75 patients). CONCLUSION: Valve-sparing operation is a safe and long-lasting procedure and performance of aortic valve repair when necessary does not increase risk of reoperation on the aortic valve.
- Early outcomes of transcatheter tricuspid valve-in-valve implantation: a case series(2019) VIOTTO, Guilherme; PAIM, Leonardo; SOUZA, Renato; APRIGIO, Joaquim; LACERDA, Lucas; POMERANTZEFF, Pablo; JATENE, Marcelo B.; PALMA, Jose Honorio; JATENE, Fabio B.OBJECTIVES: In this study, we sought to evaluate early outcomes of transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation in patients with a degenerated bioprosthesis in the tricuspid position. METHODS: We used a prospective study, which included patients with a degenerated bioprosthesis in the tricuspid position who were considered high-risk by our heart team and who underwent a valve-in-valve implantation. The procedures were performed via transjugular venous access and were done with the patient under general anaesthesia with transoesophageal echocardiographic and fluoroscopic guidance. Perioperative data were analysed, and the patients were followed prospectively. RESULTS: Seven patients were included. The baseline diagnoses were 3 patients with Ebstein's anomaly, 1 patient with tetralogy of Fallot, 1 patient with neonatal endocarditis, 1 patient with ventricular septal defect with a double tricuspid lesion and 1 patient with rheumatic mitral and tricuspid valve who underwent a combined transapical mitral and transjugular tricuspid valve-in-valve implantation. age was 33 +/- 10.8 years and 57.1% of the patients were men. The mean number of previous thoracotomies was 3 +/- 2 (range 1-5) procedures. The mean follow-up was 1.24 years. The implant was successful in all cases, and there was no need for conversion to open surgery. There were no deaths during the study period, and all patients are currently in the New York Heart Association functional class I/II. There was a statistically significant difference when the mean transvalvular gradients preimplantation and postimplantation were compared (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Percutaneous tricuspid valve implantation should be considered a safe and effective therapy and stands as a viable, reliable alternative for the treatment of a degenerated bioprosthesis in high-surgical-risk/inoperable patients.