Literature DB >> 24958751

Predictors of poor outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: results from the PARTNER (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valve) trial.

Suzanne V Arnold1, Matthew R Reynolds2, Yang Lei2, Elizabeth A Magnuson2, Ajay J Kirtane2, Susheel K Kodali2, Alan Zajarias2, Vinod H Thourani2, Philip Green2, Josep Rodés-Cabau2, Nirat Beohar2, Michael J Mack2, Martin B Leon2, David J Cohen2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a less invasive option for treatment of high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis. We sought to identify patients at high risk for poor outcome after TAVR using a novel definition of outcome that integrates quality of life with mortality. METHODS AND
RESULTS: Among 2137 patients who underwent TAVR in the PARTNER (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valve) trial or its associated continued access registry, quality of life was assessed with the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire-Overall Summary Scale (KCCQ-OS; range 0-100, where a higher score equates to a better quality of life) at baseline and at 1, 6, and 12 months after TAVR. A poor 6-month outcome (defined as death, KCCQ-OS score <45, or ≥10-point decrease in KCCQ-OS score compared with baseline) occurred in 704 patients (33%). Using a split-sample design, we developed a multivariable model to identify a parsimonious set of covariates to identify patients at high risk for poor outcome. The model demonstrated moderate discrimination (c-index=0.66) and good calibration with the observed data, performed similarly in the separate validation cohort (c-index=0.64), and identified 211 patients (10% of the population) with a ≥50% likelihood of a poor outcome after TAVR. A second model that explored predictors of poor outcome at 1 year identified 1102 patients (52%) with ≥50% likelihood and 178 (8%) with ≥70% likelihood of a poor 1-year outcome after TAVR.
CONCLUSIONS: Using a large, multicenter cohort, we have developed and validated predictive models that can identify patients at high risk for a poor outcome after TAVR. Although model discrimination was moderate, these models may help guide treatment choices and offer patients realistic expectations of outcomes based on their presenting characteristics. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00530894.
© 2014 American Heart Association, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  aortic valve stenosis; heart valves; outcomes assessment; quality of life

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24958751      PMCID: PMC4198056          DOI: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.113.007477

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Circulation        ISSN: 0009-7322            Impact factor:   29.690


  24 in total

1.  How to define a poor outcome after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: conceptual framework and empirical observations from the placement of aortic transcatheter valve (PARTNER) trial.

Authors:  Suzanne V Arnold; John A Spertus; Yang Lei; Philip Green; Ajay J Kirtane; Samir Kapadia; Vinod H Thourani; Howard C Herrmann; Nirat Beohar; Alan Zajarias; Michael J Mack; Martin B Leon; David J Cohen
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes       Date:  2013-09-10

2.  Transcatheter valve implantation for patients with aortic stenosis: a position statement from the European Association of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS) and the European Society of Cardiology (ESC), in collaboration with the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI).

Authors:  Alec Vahanian; Ottavio Alfieri; Nawwar Al-Attar; Manuel Antunes; Jeroen Bax; Bertrand Cormier; Alain Cribier; Peter De Jaegere; Gerard Fournial; Arie Pieter Kappetein; Jan Kovac; Susanne Ludgate; Francesco Maisano; Neil Moat; Friedrich Mohr; Patrick Nataf; Luc Piérard; José Luis Pomar; Joachim Schofer; Pilar Tornos; Murat Tuzcu; Ben van Hout; Ludwig K Von Segesser; Thomas Walther
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2008-05-12       Impact factor: 29.983

3.  Monitoring clinical changes in patients with heart failure: a comparison of methods.

Authors:  John Spertus; Eric Peterson; Mark W Conard; Paul A Heidenreich; Harlan M Krumholz; Philip Jones; Peter A McCullough; Ileana Pina; Joseph Tooley; William S Weintraub; John S Rumsfeld
Journal:  Am Heart J       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 4.749

4.  A 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity.

Authors:  J Ware; M Kosinski; S D Keller
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1996-03       Impact factor: 2.983

5.  Performance analysis of EuroSCORE II compared to the original logistic EuroSCORE and STS scores for predicting 30-day mortality after transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

Authors:  Eric Durand; Bogdan Borz; Matthieu Godin; Christophe Tron; Pierre-Yves Litzler; Jean-Paul Bessou; Jean-Nicolas Dacher; Fabrice Bauer; Alain Cribier; Hélène Eltchaninoff
Journal:  Am J Cardiol       Date:  2013-01-18       Impact factor: 2.778

6.  Development and evaluation of the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire: a new health status measure for heart failure.

Authors:  C P Green; C B Porter; D R Bresnahan; J A Spertus
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 24.094

7.  Reliability and validity of the Kansas City cardiomyopathy questionnaire in patients with previous myocardial infarction.

Authors:  Kjell I Pettersen; Aasmund Reikvam; Arnfinn Rollag; Knut Stavem
Journal:  Eur J Heart Fail       Date:  2005-03-02       Impact factor: 15.534

8.  Predictors and outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation using different approaches according to the valve academic research consortium definitions.

Authors:  Moritz Seiffert; Renate Schnabel; Lenard Conradi; Patrick Diemert; Johannes Schirmer; Dietmar Koschyk; Matthias Linder; Jan F Kersten; Andrea Grosser; Sandra Wilde; Stefan Blankenberg; Hermann Reichenspurner; Stephan Baldus; Hendrik Treede
Journal:  Catheter Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2013-03-18       Impact factor: 2.692

9.  Patterns of hospital performance in acute myocardial infarction and heart failure 30-day mortality and readmission.

Authors:  Harlan M Krumholz; Angela R Merrill; Eric M Schone; Geoffrey C Schreiner; Jersey Chen; Elizabeth H Bradley; Yun Wang; Yongfei Wang; Zhenqiu Lin; Barry M Straube; Michael T Rapp; Sharon-Lise T Normand; Elizabeth E Drye
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes       Date:  2009-07-09

10.  Validity, reliability, and responsiveness of the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire in anemic heart failure patients.

Authors:  John A Spertus; Philip G Jones; John Kim; Denise Globe
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2007-12-29       Impact factor: 4.147

View more
  66 in total

1.  Making Function Part of the Conversation: Clinician Perspectives on Measuring Functional Status in Primary Care.

Authors:  Francesca M Nicosia; Malena J Spar; Michael A Steinman; Sei J Lee; Rebecca T Brown
Journal:  J Am Geriatr Soc       Date:  2018-12-02       Impact factor: 5.562

Review 2.  Pre-procedural risk models for patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

Authors:  Glen P Martin; Matthew Sperrin; Mamas A Mamas
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2018-11       Impact factor: 2.895

3.  Quality-of-Life Outcomes After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in an Unselected Population: A Report From the STS/ACC Transcatheter Valve Therapy Registry.

Authors:  Suzanne V Arnold; John A Spertus; Sreekanth Vemulapalli; Zhuokai Li; Roland A Matsouaka; Suzanne J Baron; Amit N Vora; Michael J Mack; Matthew R Reynolds; John S Rumsfeld; David J Cohen
Journal:  JAMA Cardiol       Date:  2017-04-01       Impact factor: 14.676

4.  Current approaches to measuring functional status among older adults in VA primary care clinics.

Authors:  Malena J Spar; Francesca M Nicosia; Michael A Steinman; Rebecca T Brown
Journal:  Fed Pract       Date:  2017-09

5.  Can we predict who will be alive and well after transcatheter aortic valve replacement? Is that useful to individual patients?

Authors:  Larry A Allen; John S Rumsfeld
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2014-05-23       Impact factor: 29.690

6.  Evaluating TAVI outcomes-not just a matter of life and death.

Authors:  Amos Levi; Ran Kornowski
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2017-02

7.  The impact of frailty on mortality after transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

Authors:  Charat Thongprayoon; Wisit Cheungpasitporn; Kianoush Kashani
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2017-03

8.  Incorporating Quality of Life Prediction in Shared Decision Making About Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.

Authors:  Dae Hyun Kim
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes       Date:  2018-10

9.  Impact of a Claims-Based Frailty Indicator on the Prediction of Long-Term Mortality After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Medicare Beneficiaries.

Authors:  Harun Kundi; Linda R Valsdottir; Jeffrey J Popma; David J Cohen; Jordan B Strom; Duane S Pinto; Changyu Shen; Robert W Yeh
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes       Date:  2018-10

10.  Predicting Quality of Life at 1 Year After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in a Real-World Population.

Authors:  Suzanne V Arnold; David J Cohen; David Dai; Philip G Jones; Fan Li; Laine Thomas; Suzanne J Baron; Naftali Z Frankel; Susan Strong; Roland A Matsouaka; Fred H Edwards; J Matthew Brennan
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes       Date:  2018-10
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.