Christian Frerker1, Kurt Bestehorn2, Michael Schlüter3, Maike Bestehorn4, Christian W Hamm5,6, Helge Möllmann7, Hugo A Katus8, Karl-Heinz Kuck9. 1. Department of Cardiology, Asklepios Klinik St. Georg, Lohmühlenstr. 5, 20099, Hamburg, Germany. 2. Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany. 3. Asklepios Proresearch, Hamburg, Germany. 4. ProMedCon GmbH, Ebenhausen, Germany. 5. Department of Medical Clinic I, University of Giessen, Giessen, Germany. 6. Department of Cardiology, Kerckhoff Heart Center, Bad Nauheim, Germany. 7. Department of Cardiology, St. Johannes Hospital, Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany. 8. Center for Internal Medicine, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany. 9. Department of Cardiology, Asklepios Klinik St. Georg, Lohmühlenstr. 5, 20099, Hamburg, Germany. k.kuck@asklepios.com.
Abstract
AIMS: Recent randomized trials have documented the superiority of TAVR-particularly via transfemoral access-over SAVR in patients with severe aortic stenosis considered to have a high or intermediate operative risk of death. We sought to assess in-hospital outcomes of patients with severe aortic stenosis and a low risk of operative mortality undergoing routine surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) or transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a propensity-score matched comparison of all patients undergoing first-time treatment by SAVR or transfemoral TAVR (TF-TAVR) in 2014 in Germany who had a logistic EuroSCORE (logES) ≤ 10%, considered to reflect low surgical risk. The primary endpoint of our analysis was in-hospital mortality. Of 7624 SAVR and 9969 TF-TAVR procedures, 6844 (89.8%) and 2751 patients (27.6%), respectively, were considered low risk with a logES between 1.505 and 10.0%. Matching yielded 805 TF-TAVR/SAVR patient pairs with identical propensity scores and no difference in pertinent baseline characteristics, except for the logES, which was significantly higher in TF-TAVR patients (6.8 ± 1.7 vs. 4.2 ± 1.3% in SAVR patients, P < 0.001). Observed in-hospital mortalities were 1.7% (95% confidence interval, 1.1-3.0%) in SAVR and 2.0% (1.3-3.3%) in TF-TAVR patients (P = 0.85). CONCLUSION: Our finding of no difference in in-hospital mortality in propensity-score matched low-surgical-risk patients treated by SAVR or TF-TAVR in a routine clinical setting indicates that TF-TAVR can be offered safely to individual patients, despite their operative risk being low. This finding needs to be confirmed in a randomized trial.
AIMS: Recent randomized trials have documented the superiority of TAVR-particularly via transfemoral access-over SAVR in patients with severe aortic stenosis considered to have a high or intermediate operative risk of death. We sought to assess in-hospital outcomes of patients with severe aortic stenosis and a low risk of operative mortality undergoing routine surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) or transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a propensity-score matched comparison of all patients undergoing first-time treatment by SAVR or transfemoral TAVR (TF-TAVR) in 2014 in Germany who had a logistic EuroSCORE (logES) ≤ 10%, considered to reflect low surgical risk. The primary endpoint of our analysis was in-hospital mortality. Of 7624 SAVR and 9969 TF-TAVR procedures, 6844 (89.8%) and 2751 patients (27.6%), respectively, were considered low risk with a logES between 1.505 and 10.0%. Matching yielded 805 TF-TAVR/SAVR patient pairs with identical propensity scores and no difference in pertinent baseline characteristics, except for the logES, which was significantly higher in TF-TAVR patients (6.8 ± 1.7 vs. 4.2 ± 1.3% in SAVR patients, P < 0.001). Observed in-hospital mortalities were 1.7% (95% confidence interval, 1.1-3.0%) in SAVR and 2.0% (1.3-3.3%) in TF-TAVR patients (P = 0.85). CONCLUSION: Our finding of no difference in in-hospital mortality in propensity-score matched low-surgical-risk patients treated by SAVR or TF-TAVR in a routine clinical setting indicates that TF-TAVR can be offered safely to individual patients, despite their operative risk being low. This finding needs to be confirmed in a randomized trial.
Authors: Martin B Leon; Craig R Smith; Michael Mack; D Craig Miller; Jeffrey W Moses; Lars G Svensson; E Murat Tuzcu; John G Webb; Gregory P Fontana; Raj R Makkar; David L Brown; Peter C Block; Robert A Guyton; Augusto D Pichard; Joseph E Bavaria; Howard C Herrmann; Pamela S Douglas; John L Petersen; Jodi J Akin; William N Anderson; Duolao Wang; Stuart Pocock Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2010-09-22 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Jose' M Dizon; Tamim M Nazif; Paul L Hess; Angelo Biviano; Hasan Garan; Pamela S Douglas; Samir Kapadia; Vasilis Babaliaros; Howard C Herrmann; Wilson Y Szeto; Hasan Jilaihawi; William F Fearon; E Murat Tuzcu; Augusto D Pichard; Raj Makkar; Mathew Williams; Rebecca T Hahn; Ke Xu; Craig R Smith; Martin B Leon; Susheel K Kodali Journal: Heart Date: 2015-08-10 Impact factor: 5.994
Authors: Craig R Smith; Martin B Leon; Michael J Mack; D Craig Miller; Jeffrey W Moses; Lars G Svensson; E Murat Tuzcu; John G Webb; Gregory P Fontana; Raj R Makkar; Mathew Williams; Todd Dewey; Samir Kapadia; Vasilis Babaliaros; Vinod H Thourani; Paul Corso; Augusto D Pichard; Joseph E Bavaria; Howard C Herrmann; Jodi J Akin; William N Anderson; Duolao Wang; Stuart J Pocock Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2011-06-05 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: David H Adams; Jeffrey J Popma; Michael J Reardon; Steven J Yakubov; Joseph S Coselli; G Michael Deeb; Thomas G Gleason; Maurice Buchbinder; James Hermiller; Neal S Kleiman; Stan Chetcuti; John Heiser; William Merhi; George Zorn; Peter Tadros; Newell Robinson; George Petrossian; G Chad Hughes; J Kevin Harrison; John Conte; Brijeshwar Maini; Mubashir Mumtaz; Sharla Chenoweth; Jae K Oh Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2014-03-29 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Charles E Hobson; Sinan Yavas; Mark S Segal; Jesse D Schold; Curtis G Tribble; A Joseph Layon; Azra Bihorac Journal: Circulation Date: 2009-04-27 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Martin B Leon; Craig R Smith; Michael J Mack; Raj R Makkar; Lars G Svensson; Susheel K Kodali; Vinod H Thourani; E Murat Tuzcu; D Craig Miller; Howard C Herrmann; Darshan Doshi; David J Cohen; Augusto D Pichard; Samir Kapadia; Todd Dewey; Vasilis Babaliaros; Wilson Y Szeto; Mathew R Williams; Dean Kereiakes; Alan Zajarias; Kevin L Greason; Brian K Whisenant; Robert W Hodson; Jeffrey W Moses; Alfredo Trento; David L Brown; William F Fearon; Philippe Pibarot; Rebecca T Hahn; Wael A Jaber; William N Anderson; Maria C Alu; John G Webb Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2016-04-02 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Luise Gaede; Johannes Blumenstein; Christoph Liebetrau; Oliver Dörr; Won-Keun Kim; Holger Nef; Oliver Husser; Jan Gülker; Albrecht Elsässer; Christian W Hamm; Stephan Achenbach; Helge Möllmann Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2019-06-24 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Robert Michael Nechwatal; Kurt Bestehorn; Florian Leuschner; Andreas Hagendorff; Manju Guha; Axel Schlitt Journal: Herz Date: 2020-04-20 Impact factor: 1.443
Authors: Marko P O Virtanen; Markku Eskola; Maina P Jalava; Annastiina Husso; Teemu Laakso; Matti Niemelä; Tuomas Ahvenvaara; Tuomas Tauriainen; Pasi Maaranen; Eeva-Maija Kinnunen; Sebastian Dahlbacka; Jussi Jaakkola; Tuija Vasankari; Juhani Airaksinen; Vesa Anttila; Stefano Rosato; Paola D'Errigo; Mikko Savontaus; Tatu Juvonen; Mika Laine; Timo Mäkikallio; Antti Valtola; Peter Raivio; Fausto Biancari Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2019-06-05
Authors: Victor Mauri; Maria I Körber; Elmar Kuhn; Tobias Schmidt; Christian Frerker; Thorsten Wahlers; Tanja K Rudolph; Stephan Baldus; Matti Adam; Henrik Ten Freyhaus Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2020-02-18 Impact factor: 5.460