Advertisement

Pediatric Cardiology

, Volume 39, Issue 8, pp 1642–1649 | Cite as

Hybrid Pulmonary Vein Stenting in Infants with Refractory to Surgical Pulmonary Vein Stenosis Repair

  • Ja Kyoung Yoon
  • Gi Beom Kim
  • Mi Kyoung Song
  • Eun Jung Bae
  • Woong Han Kim
  • Jae Gun Kwak
  • Jeong Ryul Lee
Original Article

Abstract

Pulmonary vein stenosis (PVS) is still a frustrating disease with extremely high mortality, especially in children with multiple severe PVS. Hybrid pulmonary vein stenting (HPVS) is a rescue treatment for recurrent and malignant PVS. The aim of this study is to share our successful experience with intraoperative HPVS for recurrent PVS after total anomalous pulmonary venous connection (TAPVC) repair in infant. Six patients were identified between 2013 and January 2018, who were diagnosed with recurrent PVS and underwent HPVS in the operating room. The mean age at the time of the HPVS was 10.3 ± 2.7 months (range 7–14 months) and the mean body weight was 7.9 ± 2.6 kg (range 4.1–10.5 kg). Prior pulmonary vein surgery had been performed on average 2.7 times (range 2–3) in all patients. We used a bare-metal stent (BMS) of 6–8 mm diameter in 15 veins of five patients and a drug-eluting coronary stent (DES) in two veins of one patient. All patients had undergone several elective further pulmonary vein in-stent balloon dilatations or another stent insertion after HPVS. Over a mean follow-up of 17.3 ± 13.7 months (range 6–44 months), all patients maintained patency of stents although two patients died due to respiratory failure not associated with PVS. HPVS is a useful treatment modality for recurrent PVS patient that could save the life and achieve longer freedom from restenosis than repetitive surgical pulmonary vein widening only. Even though the prognosis of severe multiple PVS is very poor, planned HPVS could be a good palliation in this patients group.

Keywords

Pulmonary vein stenosis Stent Infant Surgery Transcatheter 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they do not have a conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. For this type of study formal consent is not required. This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.

References

  1. 1.
    Seale AN, Uemura H, Webber SA et al (2013) Total anomalous pulmonary venous connection: outcome of postoperative pulmonary venous obstruction. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 145:1255–1262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Song MK, Bae EJ, Jeong SI et al (2013) Clinical characteristics and prognostic factors of primary pulmonary vein stenosis or atresia in children. Ann Thorac Surg 95:229–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Shell KJ, Ebeid MR, Salazar JD et al (2015) “How to do it”: hybrid stent placement for pulmonary vein stenosis. World J Pediatr Congenit Heart Surg 6:284–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kovach AE, Magcalas PM, Ireland C et al (2017) Paucicellular fibrointimal proliferation characterizes pediatric pulmonary vein stenosis: clinicopathologic analysis of 213 samples from 97 patients. Am J Surg Pathol 41:1198–1204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Shi G, Zhu Z, Chen J et al (2017) Total anomalous pulmonary venous connection: the current management strategies in a pediatric cohort of 768 patients. Circulation 135:48–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Seale AN, Daubeney PE, Magee AG, Rigby ML (2006) Pulmonary vein stenosis: initial experience with cutting balloon angioplasty. Heart 92:815–820CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Balasubramanian S, Marshall AC, Gauvreau K et al (2012) Outcomes after stent implantation for the treatment of congenital and postoperative pulmonary vein stenosis in children. Circ Cardiovasc Interv 5:109–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Menon SC, Cetta F, Dearani JA et al (2008) Hybrid intraoperative pulmonary artery stent placement for congenital heart disease. Am J Cardiol 102:1737–1741CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cory MJ, Ooi YK, Kelleman MS et al (2017) Reintervention is associated with improved survival in pediatric patients with pulmonary vein stenosis. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 10:1788–1798CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fink T, Schluter M, Heeger CH et al (2017) Pulmonary vein stenosis or occlusion after catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: long-term comparison of drug-eluting versus large bare metal stents. Europace.  https://doi.org/10.1093/europace/eux291 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Degertekin M, Serruys PW, Foley DP et al (2002) Persistent inhibition of neointimal hyperplasia after sirolimus-eluting stent implantation: long-term (up to 2 years) clinical, angiographic, and intravascular ultrasound follow-up. Circulation 106:1610–1613CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Stanfill R, Nykanen DG, Osorio S et al (2008) Stent implantation is effective treatment of vascular stenosis in young infants with congenital heart disease: acute implantation and long-term follow-up results. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 71:831–841CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Riedlinger WF, Juraszek AL, Jenkins KJ et al (2006) Pulmonary vein stenosis: expression of receptor tyrosine kinases by lesional cells. Cardiovasc Pathol 15(2):91–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hausleiter J, Kastrati A, Mehilli J et al (2004) Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of oral sirolimus for restenosis prevention in patients with in-stent restenosis: the oral sirolimus to inhibit recurrent in-stent stenosis (OSIRIS) trial. Circulation 110(7):790–795CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hallbergson A, Esch JJ, Tran TX et al (2016) Systemic rapamycin to prevent in-stent stenosis in peripheral pulmonary arterial disease: early clinical experience. Cardiol Young 26(7):1319–1326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Callahan R, Kieran MW, Baird CW et al (2018) Adjunct targeted biologic inhibition agents to treat aggressive multivessel intraluminal pediatric pulmonary vein stenosis. J Pediatr.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpeds.2018.01.029 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ja Kyoung Yoon
    • 1
    • 2
  • Gi Beom Kim
    • 1
    • 4
  • Mi Kyoung Song
    • 1
  • Eun Jung Bae
    • 1
  • Woong Han Kim
    • 3
  • Jae Gun Kwak
    • 3
  • Jeong Ryul Lee
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of PediatricsSeoul National University Children’s HospitalSeoulSouth Korea
  2. 2.Department of PediatricsSejong General HospitalBucheonSouth Korea
  3. 3.Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular SurgerySeoul National University Children’s HospitalSeoulSouth Korea
  4. 4.Department of Pediatrics, Seoul National University Children’s HospitalSeoul National University College of MedicineSeoulSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations