scholarly journals TCT CONNECT-94 Right Heart Dysfunction and Clinical Outcomes in Atypical Aortic Stenosis Subtypes After Transcatheter and Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement

2020 ◽  
Vol 76 (17) ◽  
pp. B42
Author(s):  
Rashad Belin ◽  
Igor Wroblewski ◽  
Michael Wesolowski ◽  
Verghese Mathew
Circulation ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 142 (Suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ankur Panchal ◽  
Andreas Kyvernitakis ◽  
Mark Doyle ◽  
Robert W Biederman

Introduction: Treatment for severe aortic stenosis has rapidly evolved over the past decade, in both transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) technique and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR), resulting in improved clinical outcomes. We sought to determine and compare the temporal changes and 1-year outcomes between these groups. Methods: We searched the Medline MESH database using the keywords “aortic stenosis”, “atrial fibrillation” and “stroke”. We performed a meta-analysis and created funnel plots to compare TAVR with SAVR population for post-procedural stroke, all-cause and cardiovascular (CV) mortality at 1-year. Results: Out of >50 studies, we included 20 meeting criteria for analysis with total population of >65000 patients, of which 61067 had TAVR and 4162 had SAVR. AFib prevalence was higher in TAVR vs SAVR patients (38% vs 27%; p< 0.0001). By funnel plotting, post-procedural stroke at 1-year was 3.1% in TAVR and 5% in SAVR patients (NS). All-cause mortality at 1 year was 12.5% in TAVR and 10.3 % in SAVR patients, and CV mortality at 1-year was 7.4% in TAVR and 6.2% in SAVR patients (NS for both). Conclusion: While there is a trend over the last 14 years for overall improvement in both SAVR and TAVR outcomes, via meta-analysis, despite a higher prevalence of AFib in TAVR vs SAVR, there is statistical overlap in the confidence intervals supporting no distinct separation in stroke risk, all-cause mortality or adjudicated CV mortality at 1 year between groups. To our knowledge, this represents the largest study over the longest time period that points towards potential benefit at the individual level but as a socio-economic consideration, no distinction between SAVR vs TAVR.


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Charbel Abi Khalil ◽  
Barbara Ignatiuk ◽  
Guliz Erdem ◽  
Hiam Chemaitelly ◽  
Fabio Barilli ◽  
...  

AbstractTranscatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has shown to reduce mortality compared to surgical aortic valve replacement (sAVR). However, it is unknown which procedure is associated with better post-procedural valvular function. We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials that compared TAVR to sAVR for at least 2 years. The primary outcome was post-procedural patient-prosthesis-mismatch (PPM). Secondary outcomes were post-procedural and 2-year: effective orifice area (EOA), paravalvular gradient (PVG) and moderate/severe paravalvular leak (PVL). We identified 6 trials with a total of 7022 participants with severe aortic stenosis. TAVR was associated with 37% (95% CI [0.51–0.78) mean RR reduction of post-procedural PPM, a decrease that was not affected by the surgical risk at inclusion, neither by the transcatheter heart valve system. Postprocedural changes in gradient and EOA were also in favor of TAVR as there was a pooled mean difference decrease of 0.56 (95% CI [0.73–0.38]) in gradient and an increase of 0.47 (95% CI [0.38–0.56]) in EOA. Additionally, self-expandable valves were associated with a higher decrease in gradient than balloon ones (beta = 0.38; 95% CI [0.12–0.64]). However, TAVR was associated with a higher risk of moderate/severe PVL (pooled RR: 9.54, 95% CI [5.53–16.46]). All results were sustainable at 2 years.


2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (Suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Tangel ◽  
Ankur Sethi ◽  
John Kassotis

Background: It is well known that there is a significant gender gap in both the referral and outcomes of patients eligible for cardiac surgery. The impact of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) on the gender disparity in the management of aortic stenosis (AS) has not been well established. The aim of this study was to analyze the referrals to and outcomes of both surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) and TAVR for management of AS as a function of gender in a contemporary United States population. Methods: We used the National Inpatient database 2009-2015 to study the gender distribution of admissions for both SAVR and TAVR for the treatment of AS and its effect on inpatient outcomes. The survey estimation commands were used to determine weighted national estimates. Results: During the study period there were 3,443,274 (Males (M) 46.6 ± 0.1%; Females (F) 53.3 ± 0.1%) admissions for AS diagnosis, 325,264 SAVR (M 62.0 ± 0.2%; F 37.9 ± 0.2%) and 56,542 TAVR (M 52.6 ± 0.5%; F 47.3 ± 0.5%). The gender disparity was more prominent in Whites (Wh) than Non-whites (NWh) for both SAVR (Wh M 62.7 ± 0.2%, Wh F 37.2 ± 0.2%; NWh M 57.3 ± 0.5%, NWF 42.6 ± 0.5%) and TAVR (Wh M 53.1 ± 0.5%, Wh F 46.8 ± 0.5%; NWh M 47.2 ± 1.3%, NWh F 52.7 ± 1.3%). Female TAVR patients were older and more likely to have Medicare but less likely to have diabetes, chronic kidney disease (CKD), peripheral artery disease (PAD), prior coronary bypass surgery (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). They also had lower Charlson comorbidity index (CCI). However, female TAVR patients had higher inpatient deaths (OR = 1.34;1.09-1.64), bleeding (OR = 1.51; 1.40-1.62) and stroke (OR = 1.47; 1.16-1.88), but a lower rate of pacemaker implantation (0.86; 0.76-0.97) and acute renal failure (ARF) (OR = 0.78; 0.71- 0.87). SAVR females were older, more likely to have Medicare, hypertension, and heart failure but less likely to have diabetes, CKD, PAD, prior CABG and PCI, and COPD. They also had lower CCI. SAVR female patients had higher inpatient deaths (OR = 1.40; 1.29-1.53), pacemaker implantation (OR =1.19; 1.11-1.28), blood transfusion (OR = 1.40; 1.35-1.45), and stroke (OR =1.19; 1.08-1.30), but lower ARF (OR = 0.80; 0.76-0.83). Conclusion: A gender disparity in the management of aortic stenosis continues to exist; however, our study showed that TAVR appears to bridge this gap. The reduction in gender disparity was most pronounced among Non-white patients. Despite having less comorbidities, outcomes after both SAVR and TAVR remain worse in women.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document