Literature DB >> 22633667

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation versus surgical aortic valve replacement for severe aortic stenosis: results from an intermediate risk propensity-matched population of the Italian OBSERVANT study.

Paola D'Errigo1, Marco Barbanti, Marco Ranucci, Francesco Onorati, Remo Daniel Covello, Stefano Rosato, Corrado Tamburino, Francesco Santini, Gennaro Santoro, Fulvia Seccareccia.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Few studies have yielded information on comparative effectiveness of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) versus surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) procedures in a real-world setting. The aim of this analysis is to describe procedural and post-procedural outcomes in a TAVI/SAVR intermediate risk propensity-matched population.
METHODS: OBSERVANT is an observational prospective multicenter cohort study, enrolling AS patients undergoing SAVR or TAVI. Propensity score method was applied to analyze procedural and post-procedural outcomes. Pairs of patients with the same probability score were matched (caliper matching).
RESULTS: The unadjusted enrolled population (N=2108) comprises 1383 SAVR patients, 602 transarterial-TAVI patients and 123 transapical-TAVI patients. Matched population comprised a total of 266 patients (133 patients for each group). A relatively low risk population was selected (mean logistic EuroSCORE 9.4 ± 10.4% vs 8.9 ± 9.5%, SAVR vs TAVI; p=0.650). Thirty-day mortality was 3.8% for both SAVR and TAVI (p=1.000). The incidence of stroke (1.5% SAVR and 0.0% TAVI; p=0.156) and myocardial infarction (0.8% SAVR and 0.8% TAVI; p=1.000) was not statistically different between groups, whereas a higher requirement for blood transfusion was reported across the surgical cohort (49.6% vs 36.1%; p=0.026). A higher incidence of major vascular damage (5.3% vs. 0.0%; p=0.007) and pacemaker implantation(0.8% vs 12.0%; p=0.001) were reported in the TAVI group.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing transcatheter and surgical treatment of severe aortic stenosis are still extremely distinct populations. In the relatively low-risk propensity-matched population analyzed, despite similar procedural and 30-day mortality, SAVR was associated with a higher risk for blood transfusion, whereas TAVI showed a significantly increased rate of vascular damage, permanent AV block and residual aortic valve regurgitation.
Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Aortic stenosis; Intermediate risk; SAVR; TAVI

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22633667     DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2012.05.028

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Cardiol        ISSN: 0167-5273            Impact factor:   4.164


  17 in total

1.  Predictors for non-delayed discharge after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: utility of echocardiographic parameters.

Authors:  Tomoo Nagai; Hitomi Horinouchi; Yohei Ohno; Tsutomu Murakami; Katsuaki Sakai; Gaku Nakazawa; Koichiro Yoshioka; Yuji Ikari
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2020-07-25       Impact factor: 2.357

2.  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 3.  Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Outcomes, Indications, Complications, and Innovations.

Authors:  Michael N Young; Ignacio Inglessis
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2017-09-22

4.  Temporal trends in transcatheter aortic valve implantation, 2008-2014: patient characteristics, procedural issues, and clinical outcome.

Authors:  Uri Landes; Alon Barsheshet; Ariel Finkelstein; Victor Guetta; Abid Assali; Amir Halkin; Hanna Vaknin-Assa; Amit Segev; Tamir Bental; Jeremy Ben-Shoshan; Israel M Barbash; Ran Kornowski
Journal:  Clin Cardiol       Date:  2016-10-26       Impact factor: 2.882

5.  A Glimpse into the Future: In 2020, Which Patients will Undergo TAVI or SAVR?

Authors:  Crochan J O'Sullivan; Peter Wenaweser
Journal:  Interv Cardiol       Date:  2017-05

6.  The impact of transcatheter aortic valve implantation on patients' profiles and outcomes of aortic valve surgery programmes: a multi-institutional appraisal.

Authors:  Augusto D'Onofrio; Ottavio R Alfieri; Micaela Cioni; Francesco Alamanni; Melissa Fusari; Vincenzo Tarzia; Giulio Rizzoli; Gino Gerosa
Journal:  Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg       Date:  2013-01-29

7.  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

8.  Transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised and non-randomised trials.

Authors:  Vinayak Nagaraja; Jwalant Raval; Guy D Eslick; Andrew T L Ong
Journal:  Open Heart       Date:  2014-08-12

9.  The noninferiority of transcatheter aortic valve implantation compared to surgical aortic valve replacement for severe aortic disease: Evidence based on 16 randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Peng-Ying Zhao; Yong-Hong Wang; Rui-Sheng Liu; Ji-Hai Zhu; Jian-Ying Wu; Bing Song
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2021-07-16       Impact factor: 1.817

Review 10.  Advanced age and the clinical outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

Authors:  Osama Alsara; Ahmad Alsarah; Heather Laird-Fick
Journal:  J Geriatr Cardiol       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 3.327

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.