Literature DB >> 25963917

Midterm clinical outcome following Edwards SAPIEN or Medtronic Corevalve transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI): Results of the Belgian TAVI registry.

Valérie M Collas1,2, Christophe Dubois3, Victor Legrand4, Joëlle Kefer5, Bernard De Bruyne6, Jo Dens7, Inez E Rodrigus2, Paul Herijgers3, Johan M Bosmans1,2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess midterm (3 years) clinical outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in Belgium using the Edwards SAPIEN valve or the Medtronic CoreValve transcatheter heart valve (THV).
BACKGROUND: Medium and long term follow-up data of both THVs are still relatively scarce, although of great clinical relevance for a relatively new but rapidly expanding treatment modality. Therefore, reporting mid- and long term clinical outcome data, coming from large "real world" national registries, remains contributive.
METHODS: Between December 2007 and March 2012, 861 "real world" patients who were not candidates for surgical aortic valve replacement as decided by the local heart teams, underwent TAVI at 23 sites. Eleven sites exclusively used SAPIEN THV (n = 460), while 12 exclusively used CoreValve THV (n = 401). Differences in clinical outcomes by valve system were assessed, according to access route and baseline EuroSCORE risk profile (<10%: low, 10-20%: intermediate and >20%: high risk).
RESULTS: Overall cumulative survival at 3 years was 51% for SAPIEN vs. 60% for CoreValve (P = 0.021). In transfemorally treated patients, SAPIEN and CoreValve had similar survival at 3 years for each of the baseline EuroSCORE cohorts (low risk: 72% vs. 76%, P = 0.45; intermediate risk: 62% vs. 59%, P = 0.94; high risk: 48% vs. 53%, P = 0.65).
CONCLUSION: Cumulative midterm 3 year survival after transfemoral TAVI in "real world" patients refused for surgery with similar baseline EuroSCORE risk profile is not different between SAPIEN or CoreValve.
© 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  aortic stenosis; registry; transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI); valvular heart disease

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25963917     DOI: 10.1002/ccd.25999

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Catheter Cardiovasc Interv        ISSN: 1522-1946            Impact factor:   2.692


  5 in total

Review 1.  Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Comprehensive Review and Present Status.

Authors:  Sameer Arora; Jacob A Misenheimer; Radhakrishnan Ramaraj
Journal:  Tex Heart Inst J       Date:  2017-02-01

2.  Validation of transcatheter aortic valve implantation risk scores in relation to early and mid-term survival: a single-centre study.

Authors:  Valérie M Collas; Caroline M Van De Heyning; Bernard P Paelinck; Inez E Rodrigus; Christiaan J Vrints; Johan M Bosmans
Journal:  Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg       Date:  2015-12-20

3.  Long-term outcomes and prosthesis performance after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: results of self-expandable and balloon-expandable transcatheter heart valves.

Authors:  Giuseppe Tarantini; Paola A M Purita; Augusto D'Onofrio; Chiara Fraccaro; Anna Chiara Frigo; Gianpiero D'Amico; Luca Nai Fovino; Marta Martin; Francesco Cardaioli; Mostafa R A Badawy; Massimo Napodano; Gino Gerosa; Sabino Iliceto
Journal:  Ann Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2017-09

Review 4.  Cardiac implant registries 2006-2016: a systematic review and summary of global experiences.

Authors:  Shixuan Zhang; Sebastian Gaiser; Peter L Kolominsky-Rabas
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2018-04-12       Impact factor: 2.692

5.  Safety and efficacy of self-expandable Evolut R vs. balloon-expandable Sapien 3 valves for transcatheter aortic valve implantation: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Chenglin He; Lang Xiao; Junli Liu
Journal:  Exp Ther Med       Date:  2019-09-12       Impact factor: 2.447

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.