Literature DB >> 22581299

A prospective, randomised trial of transapical transcatheter aortic valve implantation vs. surgical aortic valve replacement in operable elderly patients with aortic stenosis: the STACCATO trial.

Hans H M Nielsen1, Kaj E Klaaborg, Henrik Nissen, Kim Terp, Poul E Mortensen, Bo J Kjeldsen, Carl-Johan Jakobsen, Henning R Andersen, Henrik Egeblad, Lars R Krusell, Leif Thuesen, Vibeke E Hjortdal.   

Abstract

AIMS: In a prospective randomised trial we aimed to compare transapical transcatheter aortic valve implantation (a-TAVI) with surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in operable elderly patients. METHODS AND
RESULTS: The study was designed as a randomised controlled trial of a-TAVI (Edwards SAPIEN heart valve system; Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA, USA) vs. SAVR. Operable patients with isolated aortic valve stenosis and an age ≥75 years were included. The primary endpoint was the composite of all-cause mortality, cerebral stroke and/or renal failure requiring haemodialysis at 30 days. After advice from the Data Safety Monitoring Board, the study was prematurely terminated after the inclusion of 70 patients because of an excess of events in the a-TAVI group. The primary endpoint was met in five a-TAVI patients (two deaths, two strokes, and one case of renal failure requiring dialysis) vs. one stroke in the SAVR group (p=0.07). In the a-TAVI group, one patient was converted to SAVR because of an abnormally positioned heart, and four patients were re-operated with open heart surgery because of annulus rupture (n=1), severe paravalvular leakage (n=2), and blockage of the left coronary artery (n=1). In the SAVR group, one patient was converted to TAVI because of a large intra-thoracic goitre.
CONCLUSIONS: Given the limitations of a small prematurely terminated study, our results suggest that a-TAVI in its present form may be associated with complications and device success rates in low-risk patients similar or even inferior to those found in high-risk patients with aortic valve stenosis. This will probably change in the near future with improved catheter based devices and better pre-procedural assessment.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22581299     DOI: 10.4244/EIJV8I3A58

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  EuroIntervention        ISSN: 1774-024X            Impact factor:   6.534


  39 in total

1.  Transcatheter vs. surgical aortic valve replacement and medical treatment : Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized and non-randomized trials.

Authors:  A Ak; I Porokhovnikov; F Kuethe; P C Schulze; M Noutsias; P Schlattmann
Journal:  Herz       Date:  2017-04-27       Impact factor: 1.443

Review 2.  Alternate Access for TAVI: Stay Clear of the Chest.

Authors:  Pavel Overtchouk; Thomas Modine
Journal:  Interv Cardiol       Date:  2018-09

3.  Distinct renal outcomes for transcatheter aortic valve replacement and surgical repair.

Authors:  Abhilash Koratala; Shahab Bozorgmehri; Amir Kazory
Journal:  Clin Exp Nephrol       Date:  2017-12-02       Impact factor: 2.801

Review 4.  Transcatheter vs surgical aortic-valve replacement in low- to intermediate-surgical-risk candidates: A meta-analysis and systematic review.

Authors:  Safi U Khan; Ahmad N Lone; Muhammad A Saleem; Edo Kaluski
Journal:  Clin Cardiol       Date:  2017-11-23       Impact factor: 2.882

5.  Acute kidney injury following surgical aortic valve replacement.

Authors:  Marc Najjar; Halit Yerebakan; Robert A Sorabella; Denis J Donovan; Alexander P Kossar; Sowmyashree Sreekanth; Paul Kurlansky; Michael A Borger; Michael Argenziano; Craig R Smith; Isaac George
Journal:  J Card Surg       Date:  2015-06-24       Impact factor: 1.620

6.  Ruptures of the device landing zone in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation: an analysis of TAVI Karlsruhe (TAVIK) patients.

Authors:  Gerhard Schymik; Martin Heimeshoff; Peter Bramlage; Rainer Wondraschek; Tim Süselbeck; Jan Gerhardus; Armin Luik; Herbert Posival; Claus Schmitt; Holger Schröfel
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2014-06-08       Impact factor: 5.460

Review 7.  Non-transfemoral access sites for transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

Authors:  Mariah Madigan; Rony Atoui
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2018-07       Impact factor: 2.895

8.  Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation for Treatment of Aortic Valve Stenosis: A Health Technology Assessment.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ont Health Technol Assess Ser       Date:  2016-11-01

9.  Meta-Analysis Comparing the Frequency of Stroke After Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement.

Authors:  Kuldeep Shah; Zakeih Chaker; Tatiana Busu; Vinay Badhwar; Fahad Alqahtani; Muhammad Alvi; Amelia Adcock; Mohamad Alkhouli
Journal:  Am J Cardiol       Date:  2018-07-05       Impact factor: 2.778

10.  Systematic review and meta-analysis of transcatheter aortic valve implantation versus surgical aortic valve replacement for severe aortic stenosis.

Authors:  Christopher Cao; Su C Ang; Praveen Indraratna; Con Manganas; Paul Bannon; Deborah Black; David Tian; Tristan D Yan
Journal:  Ann Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2013-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.