Literature DB >> 26433277

Clinical Outcome and Cost Analysis of Sutureless Versus Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation With Propensity Score Matching Analysis.

Giuseppe Santarpino1, Steffen Pfeiffer2, Jürgen Jessl3, Angelo Dell'Aquila4, Ferdinand Vogt2, Che von Wardenburg2, Johannes Schwab3, Joachim Sirch2, Matthias Pauschinger3, Theodor Fischlein2.   

Abstract

Surgical sutureless and interventional transcatheter aortic valve prostheses are nowadays extensively adopted in high-risk elderly patients. An explorative analysis was carried out to compare the clinical outcome and costs associated to these approaches. Since 2010, a total of 626 patients were distributed between transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI; n = 364) and sutureless (n = 262) groups. Patients of both groups were not comparable for clinical and surgical characteristics, but many patients were in a "gray zone"; therefore, a retrospective propensity score analysis was possible and performed. For the matched pair samples, postoperative, follow-up clinical data, and costs data were obtained. In-hospital death occurred in 5 patients in sutureless group and 3 patients in TAVI group (p = 0.36). Blood transfusions were higher in sutureless group (2.1 ± 2.3 vs 0.4 ± 1.0 U). TAVI group had a shorter intensive care unit and hospital stay (2.2 ± 2.7 vs 3.2 ± 3.5 days, p = 0.037; 12 ± 6 vs 14 ± 6 days, p = 0.017). No differences in postoperative neurologic (p = 0.361), renal (p = 0.106), or respiratory (p = 0.391) complications were observed between groups. At follow-up (24.5 ± 13.8 months), 1 patient in sutureless group and 7 patients in TAVI group died (p = 0.032). Paravalvular leakage occurred more frequently in patients in TAVI group (35 [34%] vs 7 [6.9%]; p <0.001) with an impact on follow-up survival rate. The costs associated to the 2 procedures are similar when the cost of the device was excluded (p = 0.217). When included, the sutureless approach resulted a cost saving (€22,451 vs €33,877, p <0.001). In conclusion, the patients in the "gray zone" record a satisfying clinical outcome after sutureless surgery and TAVI. Patients in the sutureless group endure more hospital complications, but TAVI entails a higher follow-up mortality. On the costs aspects, TAVI technologies are more expensive, and it reflects on higher overall hospital costs.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26433277     DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2015.08.043

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Cardiol        ISSN: 0002-9149            Impact factor:   2.778


  11 in total

1.  Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) versus sutureless aortic valve replacement (SUAVR) for aortic stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of matched studies.

Authors:  Nelson Wang; Yi-Chin Tsai; Natasha Niles; Vakhtang Tchantchaleishvili; Marco Di Eusanio; Tristan D Yan; Kevin Phan
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2016-11       Impact factor: 2.895

Review 2.  Long term outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI): a systematic review of 5-year survival and beyond.

Authors:  Adam Chakos; Ashley Wilson-Smith; Sameer Arora; Tom C Nguyen; Abhijeet Dhoble; Giuseppe Tarantini; Matthias Thielmann; John P Vavalle; Daniel Wendt; Tristan D Yan; David H Tian
Journal:  Ann Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2017-09

3.  Comparison of hemodynamic and clinical outcomes of transcatheter and sutureless aortic bioprostheses: how to make the right choice in intermediate risk patients.

Authors:  Augusto D'Onofrio; Assunta Fabozzo; Gino Gerosa
Journal:  Ann Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2017-09

4.  Transcatheter, sutureless and conventional aortic-valve replacement: a network meta-analysis of 16,432 patients.

Authors:  Declan Lloyd; Jessica G Y Luc; Ben Elias Indja; Vannessa Leung; Nelson Wang; Kevin Phan
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2019-01       Impact factor: 2.895

5.  Are Sutureless Aortic Valves Suitable for Severe High-Risk Patients Suffering from Active Infective Aortic Valve Endocarditis?

Authors:  Alexander Weymann; Johanna Konertz; Michael Laule; Karl Stangl; Pascal M Dohmen
Journal:  Med Sci Monit       Date:  2017-06-08

6.  Cost-utility of surgical sutureless bioprostheses vs TAVI in aortic valve replacement for patients at intermediate and high surgical risk.

Authors:  Massimiliano Povero; Antonio Miceli; Lorenzo Pradelli; Matteo Ferrarini; Matteo Pinciroli; Mattia Glauber
Journal:  Clinicoecon Outcomes Res       Date:  2018-11-08

7.  Meta-Analysis Comparing Renal Outcomes after Transcatheter versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement.

Authors:  Kuldeep Shah; Zakeih Chaker; Tatiana Busu; Rishita Shah; Mohammed Osman; Fahad Alqahtani; Mohamad Alkhouli
Journal:  J Interv Cardiol       Date:  2019-04-24       Impact factor: 2.279

8.  Valve-in-Valve Replacement Using a Sutureless Aortic Valve.

Authors:  Pascal M Dohmen; Lukas Lehmkuhl; Michael A Borger; Martin Misfeld; Friedrich W Mohr
Journal:  Am J Case Rep       Date:  2016-10-03

9.  Prognosis after surgical replacement with a bioprosthetic aortic valve in patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis: systematic review of observational studies.

Authors:  Farid Foroutan; Gordon H Guyatt; Kathleen O'Brien; Eva Bain; Madeleine Stein; Sai Bhagra; Daegan Sit; Rakhshan Kamran; Yaping Chang; Tahira Devji; Hassan Mir; Veena Manja; Toni Schofield; Reed A Siemieniuk; Thomas Agoritsas; Rodrigo Bagur; Catherine M Otto; Per O Vandvik
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2016-09-28

10.  In Vivo Response of Acellular Porcine Pericardial for Tissue Engineered Transcatheter Aortic Valves.

Authors:  Reza Khorramirouz; Jason L Go; Christopher Noble; David Morse; Amir Lerman; Melissa D Young
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-01-31       Impact factor: 4.379

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.