Literature DB >> 28304219

Surgical or Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Replacement in Intermediate-Risk Patients.

Michael J Reardon1, Nicolas M Van Mieghem1, Jeffrey J Popma1, Neal S Kleiman1, Lars Søndergaard1, Mubashir Mumtaz1, David H Adams1, G Michael Deeb1, Brijeshwar Maini1, Hemal Gada1, Stanley Chetcuti1, Thomas Gleason1, John Heiser1, Rüdiger Lange1, William Merhi1, Jae K Oh1, Peter S Olsen1, Nicolo Piazza1, Mathew Williams1, Stephan Windecker1, Steven J Yakubov1, Eberhard Grube1, Raj Makkar1, Joon S Lee1, John Conte1, Eric Vang1, Hang Nguyen1, Yanping Chang1, Andrew S Mugglin1, Patrick W J C Serruys1, Arie P Kappetein1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR) is an accepted alternative to surgery in patients with severe aortic stenosis who are at high surgical risk, less is known about comparative outcomes among patients with aortic stenosis who are at intermediate surgical risk.
METHODS: We evaluated the clinical outcomes in intermediate-risk patients with severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis in a randomized trial comparing TAVR (performed with the use of a self-expanding prosthesis) with surgical aortic-valve replacement. The primary end point was a composite of death from any cause or disabling stroke at 24 months in patients undergoing attempted aortic-valve replacement. We used Bayesian analytical methods (with a margin of 0.07) to evaluate the noninferiority of TAVR as compared with surgical valve replacement.
RESULTS: A total of 1746 patients underwent randomization at 87 centers. Of these patients, 1660 underwent an attempted TAVR or surgical procedure. The mean (±SD) age of the patients was 79.8±6.2 years, and all were at intermediate risk for surgery (Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality, 4.5±1.6%). At 24 months, the estimated incidence of the primary end point was 12.6% in the TAVR group and 14.0% in the surgery group (95% credible interval [Bayesian analysis] for difference, -5.2 to 2.3%; posterior probability of noninferiority, >0.999). Surgery was associated with higher rates of acute kidney injury, atrial fibrillation, and transfusion requirements, whereas TAVR had higher rates of residual aortic regurgitation and need for pacemaker implantation. TAVR resulted in lower mean gradients and larger aortic-valve areas than surgery. Structural valve deterioration at 24 months did not occur in either group.
CONCLUSIONS: TAVR was a noninferior alternative to surgery in patients with severe aortic stenosis at intermediate surgical risk, with a different pattern of adverse events associated with each procedure. (Funded by Medtronic; SURTAVI ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01586910 .).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28304219     DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1700456

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  N Engl J Med        ISSN: 0028-4793            Impact factor:   91.245


  457 in total

1.  Association of Hospital Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement Quality With 30-Day and 1-Year Mortality After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.

Authors:  Harun Kundi; Jeffrey J Popma; Kamal R Khabbaz; Louis M Chu; Jordan B Strom; Linda R Valsdottir; Changyu Shen; Robert W Yeh
Journal:  JAMA Cardiol       Date:  2019-01-01       Impact factor: 14.676

2.  Off-label Use of High-Risk Cardiovascular Devices: Widening the Lens.

Authors:  Karen E Joynt; Daniel B Kramer
Journal:  JAMA Cardiol       Date:  2017-08-01       Impact factor: 14.676

3.  Predictors for non-delayed discharge after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: utility of echocardiographic parameters.

Authors:  Tomoo Nagai; Hitomi Horinouchi; Yohei Ohno; Tsutomu Murakami; Katsuaki Sakai; Gaku Nakazawa; Koichiro Yoshioka; Yuji Ikari
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2020-07-25       Impact factor: 2.357

Review 4.  Valve durability after transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

Authors:  Akash Kataruka; Catherine M Otto
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2018-11       Impact factor: 2.895

Review 5.  Transcatheter aortic valve implantation: status update.

Authors:  Antoinette Neylon; Khalid Ahmed; Federico Mercanti; Faisal Sharif; Darren Mylotte
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2018-11       Impact factor: 2.895

6.  Outcomes of intermediate-risk patients treated with transcatheter and surgical aortic valve replacement in the Veterans Affairs Healthcare System: A single center 20-year experience.

Authors:  Santiago Garcia; Rosemary Kelly; Mackenzie Mbai; Sergey Gurevich; Brett Oestreich; Demetris Yannopoulos; Selcuk Adabag
Journal:  Catheter Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2018-01-09       Impact factor: 2.692

Review 7.  Workup and Management of Patients With Paradoxical Low-Flow, Low-Gradient Aortic Stenosis.

Authors:  Mohamed-Salah Annabi; Marine Clisson; Marie-Annick Clavel; Philippe Pibarot
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2018-05-02

Review 8.  Considerations in the Surgical Management of Unicuspid Aortic Stenosis.

Authors:  Andrew J Gorton; Eric P Anderson; Jonathan A Reimer; Khaled Abdelhady; Raed Sawaqed; Malek G Massad
Journal:  Pediatr Cardiol       Date:  2021-05-28       Impact factor: 1.655

9.  Stent and leaflet stresses across generations of balloon-expandable transcatheter aortic valves.

Authors:  Yue Xuan; Danny Dvir; Zhongjie Wang; Jian Ye; Julius M Guccione; Liang Ge; Elaine E Tseng
Journal:  Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg       Date:  2020-06-01

10.  Impact of a Claims-Based Frailty Indicator on the Prediction of Long-Term Mortality After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Medicare Beneficiaries.

Authors:  Harun Kundi; Linda R Valsdottir; Jeffrey J Popma; David J Cohen; Jordan B Strom; Duane S Pinto; Changyu Shen; Robert W Yeh
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes       Date:  2018-10
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.