We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
This study evaluates the retrograde approach compared to the antegrade approach in infants with PA-IVS who underwent transcatheter pulmonary valvotomy procedure at National Cardiovascular Center Harapan Kita, Jakarta, Indonesia.
Material and method:
This is a single-centre retrospective study conducted from January 2017 to June 2019 consisting of infants undergoing transcatheter pulmonary valvotomy procedures from our centre.
Results:
Among 3733 records of cardiac catheter procedure in paediatric patients during the last 3 years, there were 12 subjects with PA-IVS, where five subjects were done by antegrade approach and seven by retrograde approach. The retrograde approach is shown to excel the antegrade approach in terms of procedural time by 58.64 minutes (CI 95 % 32.97–84.29, p = 0.008) and PA-RV crossing time by 27 minutes (CI 95 % 14.01–39.99, p = 0.02). There was no significant difference in contrast used (120.23 ± 25.77 versus 150.27 ± 39.26 ml/BSA, p = 0.518), and right ventricle to pulmonary artery systolic pressure gradient after valvotomy (39.571 ± 5.814 versus 53.52 ± 29.15, p = 0.329) between the retrograde and the antegrade approach.
Conclusion:
The retrograde approach offered shorter procedural time and comparably satisfying results than the antegrade approach. The shorter procedural time was preferred due to the shorter duration of general anaesthesia, which may decrease the risk of neurodevelopmental deficits in the patient.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.