Background: Risk factors associated with outcomes for pulmonary artery (PA) stenting remain poorly defined.
Objectives: The goal of this study was to determine the effect of patient and procedural characteristics on rates of adverse events and procedural success.
Methods: Registry data were collected, and 2 definitions of procedural success were pre-specified for patients with biventricular circulation: 1) 20% reduction in right ventricular pressure or 50% increase in PA diameter; and 2) 25% reduction in right ventricular pressure or 50% decrease in PA gradient or post-procedure ratio of in-stent minimum to pre-stent distal diameter >80%. A separate definition of procedural success based on normalization of PA diameter was pre-specified for patients with single ventricle palliation.
Results: Between January 2011 and January 2014, a total of 1,183 PA stenting procedures were performed at 59 institutions across 1,001 admissions; 262 (22%) procedures were performed in patients with a single ventricle. The rate of procedural success was 76% for definition 1, 86% for definition 2, and 75% for single ventricle patients. In the multivariate analysis, ostial stenosis was significantly associated with procedural success for biventricular patients according to both definitions. The overall complication rate was 14%, with 9% of patients experiencing death or a major adverse event (MAE). According to multivariate analysis, weight <4 kg, having a single ventricle, and emergency status were significantly associated with death or MAEs.
Conclusions: In our analysis, success was >75% across all definitions, and adverse events were relatively common. Biventricular patients with an ostial stenosis had a higher probability of a successful outcome. Patients who had a single ventricle, weight <4 kg, or who underwent an emergency procedure had a higher risk of death or MAE. These findings may help inform patient selection for PA stenting.
Keywords: cardiac catheterization; congenital heart disease; pulmonary artery stenosis; success rates.
Copyright © 2016 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.