The impact of transcatheter aortic valve implantation on patients' profiles and outcomes of aortic valve surgery programmes: a multi-institutional appraisal (original) (raw)
Related papers
The American Journal of Cardiology, 2015
We hypothesized that the availability of a transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) program in hospitals impacts the overall management of patients with aortic valve disease and hence may also improve postprocedural outcomes of conventional surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). The aim of the present study was to compare the inhospital outcomes of SAVR in centers with versus without availability of a TAVI program in an unrestricted large nationwide patient population >50 years of age. SAVRs performed on patients aged >50 years were identified from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) for the years 2011 and 2012 using the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification procedure codes. SAVR cases were divided into 2 categories: those performed at hospitals with a TAVI program (SAVR-TAVI) and those without (SAVR-non-TAVI). A total of 9,674 SAVR procedures were identified: 4,526 (46.79%) in the SAVR-TAVI group and 5,148 (53.21%) in SAVR-non-TAVI group. The mean age of the study population was 70.2 -0.1 years with majority (53%) of the patients aged >70 years. The mean Charlson's co-morbidity score for patients in SAVR-TAVI group was greater (greater percentage of patients were aged >80 years, had hypertension, congestive heart failure, renal failure, and peripheral arterial disease) than that of patients in SAVR-non-TAVI group (1.6 vs 1.4, p <0.001). The propensity score matching analysis showed a statistically significant lower inhospital mortality (1.25% vs 1.72%, p [ 0.001) and complications rate (35.6% vs 37.3%, p [ 0.004) in SAVR-TAVI group compared to SAVR-non-TAVI group. The mean length of hospital stay was similar in the 2 groups the cost of hospitalization was higher in the SAVR-TAVI group ($43,894 -483 vs $41,032 -473, p <0.0001). Having a TAVI program was a significant predictor of reduced mortality and complications rate after SAVR in multivariate analysis. In conclusion, this largest direct comparative analysis demonstrates that SAVRs performed in centers with a TAVI program are associated with significantly lower mortality and complications rates compared to those performed in centers without a TAVI program. Ó 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. (Am J Cardiol 2015;-:-e-)
2018
Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has become the treatment of choice in patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis (AS) considered inoperable or at high surgical risk. More recently, TAVI has been performed also to lower risk patients based on the Heart Team decision. Few studies have studied interaction between surgical risk categories and outcomes. Aim of the study To analyze safety and efficacy (VARC-2 defined) TAVI treated patients as function of different preoperative risk. To assess independent predictors of death. Methods Four-hundred-eighty-two patients who underwent TAVI in our center between 2007 and 2017 were included in the study. According to Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score and to other parameters, all the patients were retrospectively stratified into 4 groups: prohibitive (contraindications to aortic valve replacement, n = 124), high (STS > 8, n = 131), intermediate (4 ≤ STS ≤ 8, n = 112) and low (STS < 4, n = 115) risk. Early, 1-year ...
Annals of cardiothoracic surgery, 2017
Transcatheter aortic valve implantation/replacement (TAVI/TAVR) is becoming more frequently used to treat aortic stenosis (AS), with increasing push for the procedure in lower risk patients. Numerous randomized controlled trials have demonstrated that TAVI offers a suitable alternative to the current gold standard of surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in terms of short-term outcomes. The present review evaluates long-term outcomes following TAVI procedures. Literature search using three electronic databases was performed up to June 2017. Studies which included 20 or more patients undergoing TAVI procedures, either as a stand-alone or concomitant procedure and with a follow-up of at least 5 years, were included in the present review. Literature search and data extraction were performed by two independent researchers. Digitized survival data were extracted from Kaplan-Meier curves in order to re-create the original patient data using an iterative algorithm and subsequently aggre...
Journal of Interventional Cardiology, 2014
Objectives: To determine whether outcomes from transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) vary according to access route and valve type in a real-world population. Background: Registry and uncontrolled trial data have found that patients undergoing nonfemoral TAVI have higher early and late mortality. It is not clear whether worse outcomes relate directly to access route. There have been no direct comparisons of outcomes according to valve type. Methods: Data were collected prospectively on 1,620 patients undergoing TAVI in the UK and compared in 4 groups: SAPIEN transfemoral (TF); SAPIEN transapical (TA); CoreValve TF, CoreValve subclavian. Univariable and multivariable regression analysis was performed to identify independent predictors of mortality. Results: Mortality in patients undergoing SAPIEN TAVI via a TA approach was higher than with TF at 30 days (11.2% vs. 4.4%, P < 0.01), 1 year (28.7% vs. 18.1%, P ¼ 0.01), and 2 years (56.0% vs. 43.5%, P ¼ 0.01). Logistic EuroSCORE was higher in TA patients (22.5 AE 12.9% vs. 17.7 AE 11.1%, P < 0.0001). After multivariable analysis TA access was associated with increased mortality at 30 days (OR 2.56, 95% CI 1.46-4.48, P < 0.01) and 2 years (OR 1.75, 1.08-2.74, P ¼ 0.02). There was no significant difference in mortality at any time-point between patients treated with SAPIEN (n ¼ 812) and CoreValve (n ¼ 808) prostheses. CoreValve-treated patients had a higher rate of permanent pacemaker implantation (23.1% vs. 7.2%, P < 0.0001), and grade !2 aortic regurgitation on postprocedure echocardiography (13.0% vs. 7.3%, P < 0.01). Conclusions: Patients undergoing TA TAVI experienced increased early and late mortality compared to a TF approach. Survival was not influenced by valve type. (J Interven Cardiol 2014;27:86-95)
European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, 2013
OBJECTIVES: The present analysis compared clinical and mid-term outcomes of patients with previous cardiac surgery undergoing transapical transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with propensity-matched patients undergoing conventional redo aortic valve replacement (cAVR). METHODS: Since 2008, 508 patients were treated with TAVI. Fifty-three of these patients presented with a history of cardiac surgery and underwent transapical TAVI using the Edwards SAPIEN bioprosthesis. A propensity-matched control group of 53 patients receiving cAVR was generated out of the hospital's database. The mean age for all the patients was 77.8 ± 4.5 years. The logistic EuroSCORE was 28.4 ± 13.6% in mean, and mean EuroSCORE II was 8.56 ± 3.93%. The mean follow-up time was 245 ± 323 days, which equated to a total of 700 patient-months. RESULTS: The observed hospital mortality did not differ significantly between TAVI and cAVR (TAVI: 9.4% and cAVR: 5.7%; P = 0.695). Sixmonth survival was 83.0% for the TAVI and 86.8% for the cAVR patients (P = 0.768). Postoperative bleedings (TAVI: 725 ± 1770 ml and cAVR: 1884 ± 6387; P = 0.022), the need for transfusion (TAVI: 1.7 ± 5.3 vs cAVR: 6.2 ± 13.7 units packed red blood cells (PRBC); P = 0.030), consecutive rethoracotomy (TAVI: 1.9% vs cAVR: 16.9%; P = 0.002) and postoperative delirium (TAVI: 11.5% vs cAVR: 28.3%; P = 0.046) were more common in the cAVR patients. The TAVI patients suffered more frequently from respiratory failure (TAVI: 11.3% vs cAVR: 0.0%; P = 0.017) and mean grade of paravalvular regurgitation (TAVI: 0.8 ± 0.2 vs cAVR: 0.0; P = 0.047). Although primary ventilation time (P = 0.020) and intensive care unit stay (P = 0.022) were shorter in the TAVI patients, mean hospital stay did not differ significantly (P = 0.108). CONCLUSIONS: Transapical TAVI as well as surgical aortic valve replacement provided good clinical results. The pattern of postoperative morbidity and mortality was different for both entities, but the final clinical outcome did not differ significantly. Both techniques can be seen as complementary approaches by means of developing a tailor-made and patient-orientated surgery.