Literature DB >> 27296202

Two-Year Outcomes in Patients With Severe Aortic Valve Stenosis Randomized to Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement: The All-Comers Nordic Aortic Valve Intervention Randomized Clinical Trial.

Lars Søndergaard1, Daniel Andreas Steinbrüchel2, Nikolaj Ihlemann2, Henrik Nissen2, Bo Juel Kjeldsen2, Petur Petursson2, Anh Thuc Ngo2, Niels Thue Olsen2, Yanping Chang2, Olaf Walter Franzen2, Thomas Engstrøm2, Peter Clemmensen2, Peter Skov Olsen2, Hans Gustav Hørsted Thyregod2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The Nordic Aortic Valve Intervention (NOTION) trial was the first to randomize all-comers with severe native aortic valve stenosis to either transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with the CoreValve self-expanding bioprosthesis or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR), including a lower-risk patient population than previous trials. This article reports 2-year clinical and echocardiographic outcomes from the NOTION trial. METHODS AND
RESULTS: Two-hundred eighty patients from 3 centers in Denmark and Sweden were randomized to either TAVR (n=145) or SAVR (n=135) with follow-up planned for 5 years. There was no difference in all-cause mortality at 2 years between TAVR and SAVR (8.0% versus 9.8%, respectively; P=0.54) or cardiovascular mortality (6.5% versus 9.1%; P=0.40). The composite outcome of all-cause mortality, stroke, or myocardial infarction was also similar (15.8% versus 18.8%, P=0.43). Forward-flow hemodynamics were improved following both procedures, with effective orifice area significantly more improved after TAVR than SAVR (effective orifice area, 1.7 versus 1.4 cm(2) at 3 months). Mean valve gradients were similar after TAVR and SAVR. When patients were categorized according to Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality (STS-PROM) (<4% versus ≥4%), there was no statistically significant difference for TAVR and SAVR groups in the composite outcome for low-risk (14.7%, 95% confidence interval, 8.3-21.2 versus 16.8%; 95% confidence interval, 9.7-23.8; P=0.58) or intermediate-risk patients (21.1% versus 27.1%; P=0.59).
CONCLUSIONS: Two-year results from the NOTION trial demonstrate the continuing safety and effectiveness of TAVR in lower-risk patients. Longer-term data are needed to verify the durability of this procedure in this patient population. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01057173.
© 2016 American Heart Association, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  bioprosthesis; hemodynamics; myocardial infarction; stroke; transcatheter aortic valve replacement

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27296202     DOI: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.115.003665

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Interv        ISSN: 1941-7640            Impact factor:   6.546


  40 in total

1.  2020 update of the Austrian Society of Cardiology (ÖKG) and the Austrian Society of Cardiac Surgery (ÖGHTG) on the position statement of the ÖKG and ÖGHTG for transcatheter aortic valve implantation 2011.

Authors:  Gudrun Lamm; Matthias Hammerer; Uta C Hoppe; Martin Andreas; Rudolf Berger; Ronald K Binder; Nikolaos Bonaros; Georg Delle-Karth; Matthias Frick; Michael Grund; Bernhard Metzler; Thomas Neunteufl; Philipp Pichler; Albrecht Schmidt; Wilfried Wisser; Andreas Zierer; Rainald Seitelberger; Michael Grimm; Alexander Geppert
Journal:  Wien Klin Wochenschr       Date:  2021-03-23       Impact factor: 1.704

Review 2.  Interventional treatment of the aortic valve : Current evidence.

Authors:  F Jansen; N Werner
Journal:  Herz       Date:  2017-09       Impact factor: 1.443

Review 3.  Cardiac surgery 2017 reviewed.

Authors:  Torsten Doenst; Hristo Kirov; Alexandros Moschovas; David Gonzalez-Lopez; Rauf Safarov; Mahmoud Diab; Steffen Bargenda; Gloria Faerber
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2018-05-17       Impact factor: 5.460

4.  Head to head transcatheter heart valve comparisons: when theory becomes reality.

Authors:  Gabriela Tirado-Conte; German Armijo; Luis Nombela-Franco
Journal:  Cardiovasc Diagn Ther       Date:  2018-08

5.  Mechanically expanding transcatheter aortic valves: pros and cons of a unique device technology.

Authors:  Kenan Yalta; Muhammet Gurdogan; Cafer Zorkun; Yekta Gurlertop
Journal:  Cardiovasc Diagn Ther       Date:  2018-08

Review 6.  Transcatheter vs surgical aortic-valve replacement in low- to intermediate-surgical-risk candidates: A meta-analysis and systematic review.

Authors:  Safi U Khan; Ahmad N Lone; Muhammad A Saleem; Edo Kaluski
Journal:  Clin Cardiol       Date:  2017-11-23       Impact factor: 2.882

7.  Association of Guideline Adherence for Serial Evaluations With Survival and Adverse Clinical Events in Patients With Asymptomatic Severe Aortic Stenosis.

Authors:  Aisha Ahmed; Paul Sorajja; Ross F Garberich; R Saeid Farivar; Kevin M Harris; Mario Gössl
Journal:  JAMA Cardiol       Date:  2017-10-01       Impact factor: 14.676

Review 8.  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

Review 9.  Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Outcomes, Indications, Complications, and Innovations.

Authors:  Michael N Young; Ignacio Inglessis
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2017-09-22

Review 10.  Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in women.

Authors:  Dipti Itchhaporia
Journal:  Clin Cardiol       Date:  2018-02-27       Impact factor: 2.882

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.