Literature DB >> 25832034

Propensity-matched comparisons of clinical outcomes after transapical or transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a placement of aortic transcatheter valves (PARTNER)-I trial substudy.

Eugene H Blackstone1, Rakesh M Suri2, Jeevanantham Rajeswaran2, Vasilis Babaliaros2, Pamela S Douglas2, William F Fearon2, D Craig Miller2, Rebecca T Hahn2, Samir Kapadia2, Ajay J Kirtane2, Susheel K Kodali2, Michael Mack2, Wilson Y Szeto2, Vinod H Thourani2, E Murat Tuzcu2, Mathew R Williams2, Jodi J Akin2, Martin B Leon2, Lars G Svensson2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The higher risk of adverse outcomes after transapical (TA) versus transfemoral (TF) transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) could be attributable to TA-TAVR being an open surgical procedure or to clinical differences between TA- and TF-TAVR patients. We compared outcomes after neutralizing patient differences using propensity score matching. METHODS AND
RESULTS: From April 2007 to February 2012, 1100 Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves (PARTNER)-I patients underwent TA-TAVR and 1521 underwent TF-TAVR with Edwards SAPIEN balloon-expandable bioprostheses. Propensity matching based on 111 preprocedural variables, exclusive of femoral access morphology, identified 501 well-matched patient pairs (46% of possible matches), 95% of whom had peripheral arterial disease. Matched TA-TAVR patients experienced more adverse procedural events, longer length of stay (5 versus 8 days; P<0.0001), and slower recovery (New York Heart Association class I, 31% versus 38% at 30 days, equalizing by 6 months at 51% versus 47%); stroke risk was similar (3.4% versus 3.3% at 30 days and 6.0% versus 6.7% at 3 years); mortality was elevated for the first 6 postprocedural months (19% versus 12%; P=0.01); but aortic regurgitation was less (34% versus 52% mild and 8.9% versus 12% moderate to severe at discharge, P=0.001; 36% versus 50% mild and 10% versus 15% moderate to severe at 6 months, P<0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: The likelihood of adverse periprocedural events and prolonged recovery is greater after TA-TAVR than TF-TAVR in vasculopathic patients after accounting for differences in cardiovascular risk factors, although stroke risk is equivalent and aortic regurgitation is less. As smaller delivery systems permit TF-TAVR in many of these patients, we recommend a TF-first access strategy for TAVR when anatomically feasible. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00530894.
© 2015 American Heart Association, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  aortic valve insufficiency; mortality; propensity score; stroke; transcatheter aortic valve replacement

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25832034     DOI: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.114.012525

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


  39 in total

1.  Shifting paradigms for treatment of symptomatic aortic stenosis in lower risk populations: role of a newer generation balloon-expandable transcatheter aortic valve implantation device.

Authors:  Erik Walter Holy; Mohamed Abdel-Wahab
Journal:  Cardiovasc Diagn Ther       Date:  2017-06

2.  Transcatheter aortic valve replacement: favorable clinical outcomes support role in intermediate risk surgical patients.

Authors:  Ravilla Mahidhar; Jon R Resar
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2016-09       Impact factor: 2.895

Review 3.  Alternate Access for TAVI: Stay Clear of the Chest.

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

Review 4.  Update in the Evaluation and Management of Perioperative Stroke.

Authors:  Dilip Kumar Jayaraman; Sandhya Mehla; Saurabh Joshi; Divya Rajasekaran; Richard P Goddeau
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2019-11-27

Review 5.  Cardiac surgery 2015 reviewed.

Authors:  Torsten Doenst; Constanze Strüning; Alexandros Moschovas; David Gonzalez-Lopez; Yasin Essa; Hristo Kirov; Mahmoud Diab; Gloria Faerber
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2016-06-29       Impact factor: 5.460

6.  In-hospital outcomes comparison of transfemoral vs transapical transcatheter aortic valve replacement in propensity-matched cohorts with severe aortic stenosis.

Authors:  Rajkumar Doshi; Priyank Shah; Perwaiz M Meraj
Journal:  Clin Cardiol       Date:  2018-03-24       Impact factor: 2.882

7.  Sex differences in outcomes with transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

Authors:  Feng Qian; Edward L Hannan
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2017-08

Review 8.  Transapical approach in transcatheter cardiovascular interventions.

Authors:  Minoru Tabata
Journal:  Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2018-01-25

9.  Percutaneous transaxillary access for TAVR: Another opportunity to stay out of the chest.

Authors:  Toby Rogers; Robert J Lederman
Journal:  Catheter Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2018-01-01       Impact factor: 2.692

10.  Early clinical and echocardiographic outcomes after SAPIEN 3 transcatheter aortic valve replacement in inoperable, high-risk and intermediate-risk patients with aortic stenosis.

Authors:  Susheel Kodali; Vinod H Thourani; Jonathon White; S Chris Malaisrie; Scott Lim; Kevin L Greason; Mathew Williams; Mayra Guerrero; Andrew C Eisenhauer; Samir Kapadia; Dean J Kereiakes; Howard C Herrmann; Vasilis Babaliaros; Wilson Y Szeto; Rebecca T Hahn; Philippe Pibarot; Neil J Weissman; Jonathon Leipsic; Philipp Blanke; Brian K Whisenant; Rakesh M Suri; Raj R Makkar; Girma M Ayele; Lars G Svensson; John G Webb; Michael J Mack; Craig R Smith; Martin B Leon
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2016-03-31       Impact factor: 29.983

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.