Advertisement

Interventional cardiology today

Conference paper

Abstract

It is fascinating to see the interest in aortic valvuloplasty which has grown from a curiosity to nearly 100 communications being submitted to the American Heart Association on the subject. One point of confusion has been the differing results between the Rouen group and the groups in the United States. However, as one considers patients who are truly inoperable from the group in Rouen, we see that the results are very similar to those from groups in the United States who have taken on valvuloplasty only when surgery is rejected. The results of valvuloplasty based on a number of individual communications and also the registries that have been instituted show similar trends. The in-hospital mortality to this point in the U.S. has ranged somewhere between 5 % and 10 %. What is the cause of that mortality? In our group, we do not have a vast experience with valvuloplasty because we have a very aggressive surgical group who will operate on almost all patients who could be candidates for valvuloplasty. If they reject the patient for surgery, we then do valvuloplasty.

Keywords

Bypass Surgery Balloon Aortic Valvuloplasty Mitral Commissurotomy Bilateral Internal Thoracic Artery Internal Thoracic Artery Graft 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Holland K, Brown K, Kirsh M, et al. (1988) One Year clinical follow-up of balloon aortic valvuloplasty vs aortic valve replacement in elderly operative candidates. Circulation 78Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Reyes VP, Raju BS, Raju ARG, Turi ZG (1988) Percutaneous balloon mitral valvuloplasty vs surgery: results of a randomized clinical trail. Circulation 78Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gruentzig AR, King SB III, Schlumpf M, Siegenthaler W (1987) Long-term follow-up after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. N Engl J Med 316: 1127–32PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Talley JD, Hurst JW, King SB III et al. (1988) Clinical outcome 5 years after attempted percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty in 427 patients. Circulation 77: 820–829PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Roubin G, Weintraub WS, Sutor C, et al. (1987) Event free survival after successful angioplasty in multi-vessel coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 9: 15AGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ryan TJ, Faxon DP, Gunnar RM, et al. (1988) ACC/AHA task force report. Guidelines for percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. J Am Coll Cardiol 12: 529–545Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. King
    • 1
  1. 1.Andreas Grüntzig Cardiovascular Center, Department of Medicine (Cardiology)Emory University, School of MedicineAtlantaUSA

Personalised recommendations