George L Zorn1, Stephen H Little2, Peter Tadros3, G Michael Deeb4, Thomas G Gleason5, John Heiser6, Neal S Kleiman2, Jae K Oh7, Jeffrey J Popma8, David Adams9, Jian Huang10, Michael J Reardon2. 1. Cardiovascular Research Institute, University of Kansas Hospital, Kansas City, Kan. Electronic address: gzorn@kumc.edu. 2. Houston Methodist DeBakey Heart and Vascular Center, The Houston Methodist Hospital, Houston, Tex. 3. Cardiovascular Research Institute, University of Kansas Hospital, Kansas City, Kan. 4. University of Michigan Medical Center, Ann Arbor, Mich. 5. University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburg, Pa. 6. Spectrum Health Hospitals, Grand Rapids, Mich. 7. Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn. 8. Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Mass. 9. Mount Sinai Medical Center, New York, NY. 10. Medtronic, Minneapolis, Minn.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We compared the incidence of prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) between transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) using a self-expanding bioprosthesis and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in the CoreValve US High Risk Pivotal Trial. We sought to determine the influence of PPM on clinical outcomes. METHODS:Patients with severe aortic stenosis and at increased risk for surgery were randomized 1:1 to TAVR or SAVR. Postoperative PPM was defined by the effective orifice area index (EOAi) as severe PPM (EOAi ≤ 0.65 cm(2)/m(2)) and no severe PPM (EOAi > 0.65 cm(2)/m(2)); clinical outcomes were analyzed in the TAVR arm (n = 389) and SAVR arm (n = 353). Left ventricular mass index and regression were analyzed at baseline and 1 year. RESULTS: The incidence of severe PPM in the SAVR group at 1 year was 25.7% versus 6.2% in the TAVR group (P < .0001). Left ventricular mass index regression at 1 year was 6.8% for TAVR and 15.1% for SAVR in patients with severe PPM. At 1 year the rate of all-cause mortality and acute kidney injury were significantly greater in all patients (TAVR + SAVR) with severe PPM compared with no severe PPM (20.6% vs 12.0% [P = .0145] for death and 19.2% vs 8.5% [P = .0008] for acute kidney injury). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with high surgical risk and severe aortic stenosis, severe PPM is more common in patients treated with SAVR than those treated with TAVR. Patients with severe PPM are a greater risk for death and acute kidney injury than patients without severe PPM.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: We compared the incidence of prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) between transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) using a self-expanding bioprosthesis and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in the CoreValve US High Risk Pivotal Trial. We sought to determine the influence of PPM on clinical outcomes. METHODS:Patients with severe aortic stenosis and at increased risk for surgery were randomized 1:1 to TAVR or SAVR. Postoperative PPM was defined by the effective orifice area index (EOAi) as severe PPM (EOAi ≤ 0.65 cm(2)/m(2)) and no severe PPM (EOAi > 0.65 cm(2)/m(2)); clinical outcomes were analyzed in the TAVR arm (n = 389) and SAVR arm (n = 353). Left ventricular mass index and regression were analyzed at baseline and 1 year. RESULTS: The incidence of severe PPM in the SAVR group at 1 year was 25.7% versus 6.2% in the TAVR group (P < .0001). Left ventricular mass index regression at 1 year was 6.8% for TAVR and 15.1% for SAVR in patients with severe PPM. At 1 year the rate of all-cause mortality and acute kidney injury were significantly greater in all patients (TAVR + SAVR) with severe PPM compared with no severe PPM (20.6% vs 12.0% [P = .0145] for death and 19.2% vs 8.5% [P = .0008] for acute kidney injury). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with high surgical risk and severe aortic stenosis, severe PPM is more common in patients treated with SAVR than those treated with TAVR. Patients with severe PPM are a greater risk for death and acute kidney injury than patients without severe PPM.
Authors: Paolo Nardi; Calogera Pisano; Fabio Bertoldo; Sara Rita Vacirca; Monica Greci; Carlo Bassano; Antonio Scafuri; Antonio Pellegrino; Giovanni Ruvolo Journal: J Thorac Dis Date: 2019-04 Impact factor: 2.895
Authors: Matti Adam; Victor Mauri; Sarah Schmidt; Vera Fortmeier; Sebastian Ludwig; Hendrik Wienemann; Maria Isabel Körber; Samuel Lee; Max Meertens; Sascha Macherey; Christos Iliadis; Elmar Kuhn; Kaveh Eghbalzadeh; Sabine Bleiziffer; Stephan Baldus; Niklas Schofer; Tanja Katharina Rudolph Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2022-06-15 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Robert J M Klautz; A Pieter Kappetein; Rüdiger Lange; Francois Dagenais; Louis Labrousse; Vinayak Bapat; Michael Moront; Martin Misfeld; Cathy Zeng; Joseph F Sabik Iii Journal: Eur J Cardiothorac Surg Date: 2017-09-01 Impact factor: 4.191
Authors: Pier Pasquale Leone; Fabio Fazzari; Francesco Cannata; Jorge Sanz-Sanchez; Antonio Mangieri; Lorenzo Monti; Ottavia Cozzi; Giulio Giuseppe Stefanini; Renato Bragato; Antonio Colombo; Bernhard Reimers; Damiano Regazzoli Journal: Front Cardiovasc Med Date: 2021-06-04
Authors: Zulian Liu; Elaine Kidney; Danai Bem; George Bramley; Susan Bayliss; Mark A de Belder; Carole Cummins; Rui Duarte Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-05-10 Impact factor: 3.240