關(guān) 欣, 白志生
(陜西省寶雞市人民醫(yī)院心血管內(nèi)科, 陜西 寶雞 721000)
Amplatzer封堵器在左心耳封堵術(shù)治療出血風(fēng)險(xiǎn)性心房顫動(dòng)患者中的臨床療效
關(guān) 欣, 白志生
(陜西省寶雞市人民醫(yī)院心血管內(nèi)科, 陜西 寶雞721000)
目的探討Amplatzer封堵器在左心耳封堵術(shù)治療出血風(fēng)險(xiǎn)性心房顫動(dòng)患者中的臨床療效。方法選取2013年3月至2015年5月我院心內(nèi)科收治的行左心耳封堵術(shù)治療出血風(fēng)險(xiǎn)性心房顫動(dòng)患者60例作為LAAO組,另選取同期出血風(fēng)險(xiǎn)性心房顫動(dòng)患者80例作為對照組。比較兩組患者治療前后血漿ANP水平、左室射血分?jǐn)?shù)(LVEF)和LAA峰值排空速度,同時(shí)比較兩組1年及2年期生存率。結(jié)果LAAO組術(shù)后72h及術(shù)后3個(gè)月血漿ANP水平較術(shù)前均減少,差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P<0.05);術(shù)后3個(gè)月后恢復(fù)至26.56±5.17(pg/mL),與對照組相比差異無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P>0.05)。術(shù)后3個(gè)月兩組患者心功能指標(biāo)較治療前均有改善,且觀察組患者各項(xiàng)心功能指標(biāo)改善均優(yōu)于對照組,差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P<0.05)。兩組患者1年期(88.3%vs72.5%)及2年期(53.3%vs38.8%)生存率比較,差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P<0.05)。結(jié)論左心耳封堵術(shù)治療出血風(fēng)險(xiǎn)性心房顫動(dòng)應(yīng)用Amplatzer封堵器能有效提高患者生存率,改善心臟功能,具有較好的應(yīng)用前景。
Amplatzer封堵器; 左心耳封堵術(shù); 出 血; 心房顫動(dòng)
心房顫動(dòng)是心內(nèi)科常見的心率失常,多見于老年患者[1]。華法林抗凝治療是目前用于預(yù)防心房顫動(dòng)卒中風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的首選藥物,但由于華法林治療指數(shù)較窄且影響因素較多,存在出血風(fēng)險(xiǎn)[2]。左心耳封堵術(shù)為長期抗凝治療禁忌的心房顫動(dòng)患者提供了新的選擇。國外臨床研究表明,左心耳封堵術(shù)在治療房顫中是有效、可行的,但多數(shù)封堵器存在損傷性大、不穩(wěn)定性等并發(fā)癥,仍有必要進(jìn)一步探索研制新型的封堵器[3,4]。為此,本研究對左心耳封堵術(shù)治療出血風(fēng)險(xiǎn)性心房顫動(dòng)患者應(yīng)用Amplatzer封堵器,探討其臨床療效,現(xiàn)將相關(guān)結(jié)果報(bào)道如下:
1.1一般資料:選取2013年3月至2015年5月我院心內(nèi)科收治的行左心耳封堵術(shù)治療出血風(fēng)險(xiǎn)性心房顫動(dòng)患者60例作為LAAO組,另選取同期出血風(fēng)險(xiǎn)性心房顫動(dòng)患者80例作為對照組。納入標(biāo)準(zhǔn):①年齡≥18歲;②經(jīng)臨床、X線片、心臟超聲診斷符合出血風(fēng)險(xiǎn)性心房顫動(dòng)診斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn),伴有陣發(fā)性、持續(xù)性或永久性心房顫動(dòng)病史;③CHADS2評分≥1分。本次研究已經(jīng)過我院倫理委員會(huì)批準(zhǔn),每位患者均已簽署知情同意書。兩組患者年齡分布、性別、CHA2DS2-VASc評分、HAS-BLED評分、合并癥及心功能指標(biāo)等一般資料比較差別無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P>0.05),具有可比性。具體臨床資料見表1。
1.2方法:Amplatzer封堵由美國AGA公司生產(chǎn),常規(guī)電生理檢查后,經(jīng)第4肋劍橫切口進(jìn)胸,撐開肋間暴露心包,心耳鉗提起左心耳,沿鉗下緣用PROLENE線作一荷包縫合。將Amplatzer封堵器置入10-12F鞘,導(dǎo)引鋼絲將封堵器推送入心耳,封堵器自膨脹并充滿左心耳,退出外鞘,結(jié)扎荷包,逐層縫合皮膚關(guān)閉胸腔。術(shù)后15d、30d分別采用彩色多普勒超聲診斷儀檢查封堵器有無移位或破裂,封堵器表面有無血栓形成等。應(yīng)用彩色多普勒超聲診斷儀測定左室射血分?jǐn)?shù)(LVEF)和LAA峰值排空速度。
1.3觀察指標(biāo):比較兩組患者治療前后血漿ANP水平、左室射血分?jǐn)?shù)(LVEF)和LAA峰值排空速度,同時(shí)比較兩組1年及2年期生存率。血清ANP測定:于封堵術(shù)中穿刺股靜脈采集靜脈血3mL,術(shù)后72h及術(shù)后隨訪3個(gè)月分別采集靜脈血3mL?;靹螂x心后分別置于-80℃冰箱中保存。取上清液應(yīng)用放射免疫法測定ANP值。
1.4統(tǒng)計(jì)分析:數(shù)據(jù)統(tǒng)計(jì)分析采用SPSS23.0軟件進(jìn)行,符合正態(tài)分布的計(jì)量資料以均數(shù)±標(biāo)準(zhǔn)差表示,兩組間比較采用獨(dú)立樣本t檢驗(yàn),計(jì)數(shù)資料采用百分率表示,組間比較采用(校正)卡方檢驗(yàn),等級資料、偏態(tài)分布資料組間比較采用秩和檢驗(yàn),檢驗(yàn)水準(zhǔn)α=0.05,以P<0.05為差異具有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義。
2.1兩組一般資料比較:兩組患者一般臨床資料比較見表1。應(yīng)用CHA2DS2-VASc評分系統(tǒng)和HAS-BLED評分系統(tǒng)評估出血風(fēng)險(xiǎn)發(fā)現(xiàn),兩組年齡分布、女性比例、CHA2DS2-VASc評分、HAS-BLED評分、合并癥、腦卒中或腦栓塞或TIA病史、治療前心功能指標(biāo)等一般資料相比,差異無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P>0.05),見表1。
表1 兩組一般資料比較
2.2兩組患者治療前后血漿ANP(心房利鈉肽)水平比較:LAAO組術(shù)后72h及術(shù)后3個(gè)月血漿ANP水平較術(shù)前均減少,差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P<0.05);術(shù)后3個(gè)月后恢復(fù)至26.56±5.17(pg/mL),與LNR組相比差異無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P>0.05),見表2。
表2 兩組患者治療前后血漿ANP(pg/mL)水平變化
2.3兩組患者治療后心功能指標(biāo)比較:術(shù)前兩組心功能指標(biāo)相比差異無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P>0.05),術(shù)后3個(gè)月,兩組患者心功能指標(biāo)較治療前均有改善,且觀察組患者各項(xiàng)心功能指標(biāo)改善均優(yōu)于對照組,差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P<0.05),見表3。
表3 兩組患者治療后心功能指標(biāo)比較
2.4兩組1年及3年期生存率比較:本研究中LAAO組患者1年期死亡7例,2年期死亡28例,主要為腦卒中或腦栓塞患者;對照組患者1年期死亡22例,2年期死亡49例,主要死于腦卒中、肝腎功能衰竭和惡性腫瘤。兩組患者1年期(88.3%vs72.5%)及2年期(53.3%vs38.8%)生存率比較,差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P<0.05),見表4。
表4 兩組1年期及2年期生存率比較n(%)
左心耳封堵術(shù)是經(jīng)皮穿刺后,經(jīng)腹股溝經(jīng)脈、右心房、房間隔將封堵器放置在左心耳開口處,完全隔離及封堵左心耳,以達(dá)到預(yù)防及阻止血栓在左心耳形成及脫落,從而預(yù)防系統(tǒng)性栓塞的方法,因其創(chuàng)傷小、疼痛輕、恢復(fù)快,近年來在臨床中發(fā)展迅速且應(yīng)用廣泛[5,6]。但由于該術(shù)式僅能封堵左心耳,阻止左心耳部位血栓形成,而不能阻止封堵器外表面、心房腔及心室等部位血栓形成,可能引起腦卒中等心腦血管疾病的發(fā)生[7,8]。此外,左心耳封堵術(shù)存在一定的手術(shù)失敗率,易導(dǎo)致心包積液、心包積血、心包填塞及相關(guān)栓塞等并發(fā)癥[9]。
近年來,隨著封堵器的開發(fā)及操作技術(shù)的日趨成熟,介入治療在出血風(fēng)險(xiǎn)性心房顫動(dòng)的應(yīng)用逐漸增多[10]。Amplatzer封堵器是由鎳鈦合金絲編織成的網(wǎng)狀結(jié)構(gòu),具有自膨脹性能,內(nèi)有多層高分子聚酯片,該裝置操作安全,可回收重新放置,且不易發(fā)生移位。在B超及X線引導(dǎo)下,通過導(dǎo)管將Amplatzer封堵器送至病變部位,患者無需開刀、疼痛輕、可控制強(qiáng)、術(shù)后恢復(fù)快,臨床效果顯著[11]。Seeger J等[12]人通過20個(gè)月隨訪調(diào)查發(fā)現(xiàn),ACP左心耳封堵器能明顯降低非瓣膜性房顫患者血栓栓塞及出血發(fā)生率,且通過6個(gè)月觀察無明顯封堵器周圍漏及相關(guān)血栓形成。
ANP作為心肌細(xì)胞分泌的心血管活性調(diào)節(jié)肽,是衡量心功能變化的一項(xiàng)重要指標(biāo)。本研究中,LAAO組術(shù)后72h及術(shù)后3個(gè)月血漿ANP水平較術(shù)前均明顯減少,術(shù)后3個(gè)月后恢復(fù)至26.56±5.17(pg/mL),與對照組相比差異無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P>0.05)。由于Amplatzer封堵器介入治療后,阻斷了左向右的異常血流,右心房和心室負(fù)荷明顯減少,同時(shí)封堵后左室負(fù)荷增加,收縮功能增強(qiáng),改善了心功能,血清ANP水平下降[13]。
LVEDD、LVESD、LVEF、CI是診斷及評價(jià)心衰嚴(yán)重程度的重要指標(biāo)[14]。本研究采用心臟彩超評價(jià)Amplatzer封堵器對心功能的影響,結(jié)果顯示,術(shù)后3個(gè)月,LAAO組患者LVEDD、LVESD、LVEF、CI指標(biāo)改善均明顯優(yōu)于對照組。說明Amplatzer封堵器在左心耳封堵術(shù)中不僅成功率較高,封堵效果滿意,而且可明顯改善增加心肌收縮力、左室射血分?jǐn)?shù)(LVEF)和心輸出量,改善心功能,對二尖瓣及肺靜脈血流也無明顯影響,術(shù)后未見二尖瓣狹窄及肺靜脈狹窄等并發(fā)癥。Bergmann MW等[15]采用Tei指數(shù)(心肌活動(dòng)指數(shù))評價(jià)Amplatzer封堵器封堵前后心功能變化,發(fā)現(xiàn)實(shí)驗(yàn)組術(shù)后1周、2周Tei指數(shù)由術(shù)前0.48±0.05增至0.60±0.08,與術(shù)前相比,有顯著性差異。通過對兩組患者術(shù)后隨訪發(fā)現(xiàn),兩組患者1年期(88.3%vs72.5%)及2年期(53.3%vs38.8%)生存率比較,差異有顯著性(P<0.05)。說明Amplatzer封堵器治療心房顫動(dòng)安全、有效,大大提高患者生存率,改善心臟功能,值得在臨床應(yīng)用和推廣。
[1] Budts W, Laenens D, Van Calenbergh F, et al. Left atrial appendage occlusion with the amplatzer cardiac plug could improve survival and prevent thrombo-embolic and major bleeding events in atrial fibrillation patients with increased bleeding risk[J].Acta Cardiol. 2016 ,71(2):135~143.
[2] Barbati G, De Domenico R, Rossi S, et al. Right atrial appendage thrombosis during atrial fibrillation: an element to look for[J].G Ital Cardiol (Rome), 2017 ,18(3):247~250.
[3] Del Furia F, Ancona MB, Giannini F, et al. First-in-man percutaneous LAA closure with an amplatzer amulet and triguard embolic protection device in a patient with LAA thrombus[J].Invasive Cardiol, 2017, 29(4):E51~E52.
[4] Yuniadi Y, Hanafy DA, Raharjo SB, et al. Amplatzer cardiac plug for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation and bigger left atrial appendix Size[J].Int Angiol, 2016 ,25(4):241~246.
[5] Hawkes MA, Pertierra L, Rodriguez-Lucci F, et al. Left atrial appendage occlusion with amplatzer cardio plug is an acceptable therapeutic option for prevention of stroke recurrence in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation and contraindication or failure of oral anticoagulation with acenocumarol[J].Arq Neuropsiquiatr, 2016 ,74(3):219~222.
[6] Kapur S, Mansour M.Left Atrial Appendage Closure Devices For Stroke Prevention[J].Arrhythm Electrophysiol Rev, 2014 ,3(1):25~29.
[7] Kebernik J, Jose J, Abdel-Wahab M, et al. Safety and efficacy of left atrial appendage closure with the amplatzer cardiac plug in very high stroke and bleeding risk patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation[J].Cardiol Ther, 2015 , 4(2):167~177.
[8] Kim JS, Lee H, Suh Y, et al. Left atrial appendage occlusion in non-valvular atrial fibrillation in a korean multi-center registry[J].Circ, 2016,80(5):1123~1130.
[9] Abualsaud A, Freixa X, Tzikas A, et al. Side-by-side comparison of LAA occlusion performance with the amplatzer cardiac plug and amplatzer amulet[J].Invasive Cardiol, 2016 , 28(1):34~38.
[10] Fahmy P, Spencer R, Tsang M, et al. Left atrial appendage closure for atrial fibrillation is safe and effective after intracranial or intraocular hemorrhage[J].Can Cardiol, 2016 ,32(3):349~354.
[11] Kiani J, Holmes DR Jr.Role of endovascular closure of the left atrial appendage in stroke prevention for atrial fibrillation[J].Curr Atheroscler Rep, 2015 ,17(11):65.
[12] Seeger J, Bothner C, Dahme T, et al.Efficacy and safety of percutaneous left atrial appendage closure to prevent thromboembolic events in atrial fibrillation patients with high stroke and bleeding risk[J].Clin Res Cardiol, 2016 ,105(3):225~229.
[13] Lange M, Bültel H, Weglage H, et al. Closure of left atrial appendage with persistent distal thrombus using an amplatzer amulet occluder[J].Invasive Cardiol, 2016 ,28(9):E75~76.
[14] Jaguszewski M, Manes C, Puippe G, et al. Cardiac CT and echocardiographic evaluation of peri-device flow after percutaneous left atrial appendage closure using the AMPLATZER cardiac plug device[J].Catheter Cardiovasc Interv, 2015 ,85(2):306~312.
[15] Bergmann MW, Landmesser U. Left atrial appendage closure for stroke prevention in non-valvular atrial fibrillation: rationale, devices in clinical development and insights into implantation techniques[J].EuroIntervention, 2014 ,10(4):497~504.
ClinicalEffectonLeftAtrialAppendageOcclusionwiththeAmplatzerCardiacPluginAtrialFibrillationPatientswithIncreasedBleedingRisk
GUANXin,BAIZhisheng
(ShaanxiBaojiPeople'sHospital,ShaanxiBaoji721000,China)
Objective: To investigate the clinical effect on left atrial appendage occlusion with the amplatzer cardiac plug in atrial fibrillation patients with increased bleeding risk.Methods60 atrial fibrillation patients with increased bleeding risk by Left atrial appendage occlusion admitted in cardiology department of our hospital during March 2013 to May 2015 were selected as LAAO group and 80 atrial fibrillation patients with increased bleeding risk for the same period as the control group. The plasma ANP, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and LAA peak, 1 year and 2 year survival rates were compared of two groups before and after treatment.ResultsThe plasma ANP level of LAAO Group after 72 h and 3 months postoperative were significantly decreased. After 3 months, the ANP level back to 26.56±5.17 (pg/ml), there was no statistically significant difference compared with control group (P>0.05). and recovered to preoperative levels after 3 months postoperative. Compared with control group, the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). The cardiac function index of two groups were significantly better than before treatment and the improvement of observation group was significantly better than control group, the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). The 1 year survival rates (88.3% vs72.5 %)and 2 year survival rates(53.3% vs38.8 %) of two groups were significant difference (P< 0.05).ConclusionLAAO with ACP seems to improve the combination of survival ,improve heart function and has good application prospect in patients with atrial fibrillation and increased bleeding risk.
Amplatzer cardiac plug; Left atrial appendage occlusion; Bleeding; Atrial fibrillation
1006-6233(2017)12-2005-05
A
10.3969/j.issn.1006-6233.2017.12.020