Jeffrey A Tice1, Frank W Sellke2, Hartzell V Schaff3. 1. Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif. 2. Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Brown Medical School and Rhode Island Hospital, Providence, RI. Electronic address: fsellke@lifespan.org. 3. Division of Cardiovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The California Technology Assessment Forum is dedicated to assessment and public reporting of syntheses of available data on medical technologies. In this assessment, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) was evaluated for patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) who are at high risk for complications. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this assessment, 5 criteria were used: Regulatory approval, sufficient scientific evidence to allow conclusions on effectiveness, evidence that the technology improves net health outcomes, evidence that the technology is as beneficial as established methods, and availability of the technology outside investigational settings. In this assessment, all 5 criteria were judged to have been met. The primary benefit of TAVR is the ability to treat AS in patients who would otherwise be ineligible for surgical aortic valve replacement. It may also be useful for patients at high surgical risk by potentially reducing periprocedural complications and avoiding the morbidity and recovery from undergoing heart surgery. Potential harms include the need for conversion to an open procedure, perioperative death, myocardial infarction, stroke, bleeding, valve embolization, aortic regurgitation, heart block that requires a permanent pacemaker, renal failure, pulmonary failure, and major vascular complications such as cardiac perforation or arterial dissection. Potential long-term harms include death, stroke, valve failure or clotting, and endocarditis. As highlighted at the February 2012 California Technology Assessment Forum meeting, the dispersion of this technology to new centers across the United States must proceed with careful thought given to training and proctoring multidisciplinary teams to become new centers of excellence. CONCLUSIONS: TAVR is a potentially lifesaving procedure that may improve quality of life for patients at high risk for surgical AVR. However, attention needs to be paid to appropriate patient selection, their preoperative evaluation, surgical techniques, and postoperative care to preserve and improve on the results attained in the Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valve trial. Specialty societies are collaborating to ensure that this happens in a rational and comprehensive manner.
BACKGROUND: The California Technology Assessment Forum is dedicated to assessment and public reporting of syntheses of available data on medical technologies. In this assessment, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) was evaluated for patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) who are at high risk for complications. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this assessment, 5 criteria were used: Regulatory approval, sufficient scientific evidence to allow conclusions on effectiveness, evidence that the technology improves net health outcomes, evidence that the technology is as beneficial as established methods, and availability of the technology outside investigational settings. In this assessment, all 5 criteria were judged to have been met. The primary benefit of TAVR is the ability to treat AS in patients who would otherwise be ineligible for surgical aortic valve replacement. It may also be useful for patients at high surgical risk by potentially reducing periprocedural complications and avoiding the morbidity and recovery from undergoing heart surgery. Potential harms include the need for conversion to an open procedure, perioperative death, myocardial infarction, stroke, bleeding, valve embolization, aortic regurgitation, heart block that requires a permanent pacemaker, renal failure, pulmonary failure, and major vascular complications such as cardiac perforation or arterial dissection. Potential long-term harms include death, stroke, valve failure or clotting, and endocarditis. As highlighted at the February 2012 California Technology Assessment Forum meeting, the dispersion of this technology to new centers across the United States must proceed with careful thought given to training and proctoring multidisciplinary teams to become new centers of excellence. CONCLUSIONS: TAVR is a potentially lifesaving procedure that may improve quality of life for patients at high risk for surgical AVR. However, attention needs to be paid to appropriate patient selection, their preoperative evaluation, surgical techniques, and postoperative care to preserve and improve on the results attained in the Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valve trial. Specialty societies are collaborating to ensure that this happens in a rational and comprehensive manner.
Authors: Rakesh M Suri; Sa'ar Minha; Oluseun Alli; Ron Waksman; Charanjit S Rihal; Lowell P Satler; Kevin L Greason; Rebecca Torguson; Augusto D Pichard; Michael Mack; Lars G Svensson; Jeevanantham Rajeswaran; Ashley M Lowry; John Ehrlinger; Stephanie L Mick; E Murat Tuzcu; Vinod H Thourani; Raj Makkar; David Holmes; Martin B Leon; Eugene H Blackstone Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2016-04-13 Impact factor: 5.209