Tom C Nguyen1, Matthew D Terwelp1, Vinod H Thourani2, Yelin Zhao3, Nidal Ganim3, Carson Hoffmann1, Monica Justo1, Anthony L Estrera1, Richard W Smalling3, Prakash Balan3, Joseph Lamelas4. 1. Department of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery, University of Texas Medical School at Houston, Memorial Hermann Hospital - Heart and Vascular Institute, Houston, TX, USA. 2. Structural Heart and Valve Center, Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA. 3. Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Cardiology, University of Texas Medical School at Houston, Memorial Hermann Hospital - Heart and Vascular Institute, Houston, TX, USA. 4. Department of Cardiac Surgery, Mount Sinai Medical Center, Miami Beach, FL, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (MIAVR) have emerged as alternatives to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) via traditional sternotomy. However, their effect on clinical practice remains unclear. The study's objective is to describe clinical trends between TAVR, MIAVR and SAVR in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS). METHODS: This retrospective observational study analyzed trends in isolated severe aortic valve replacement (AVR) among three high volume TAVR, MIAVR and SAVR centres in the United States. The cohort included 2571 patients from 2011 through 2014 undergoing SAVR ( n = 842), MIAVR ( n = 699) and TAVR ( n = 1030) further stratified into transapical (TA-TAVR) and trans-femoral (TF-TAVR). RESULTS: Total AVR volume increased +107% with increases in TF-TAVR (+595%) and MIAVR (+57%). However, SAVR (-15%) and TA-TAVR (-49%) decreased from 2013 to 2014. In the final year, risk stratification by age ≥ 80, redo AVR, patients receiving dialysis and STS score >8% revealed increases in TF-TAVR and MIAVR, while SAVR decreased for all groups. CONCLUSIONS: TF-TAVR and MIAVR increased while SAVR and TA-TAVR trended down in the latter periods, which underscore a paradigm shift in the treatment of severe AS and the importance of surgeon adoption of TF-TAVR and MIAVR techniques. As the demand for minimally invasive modalities increases, further studies comparing MIAVR versus TF-TAVR in low and intermediate risk patients are warranted. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery 2017. This work is written by US Government employees and is in the public domain in the US.
OBJECTIVES: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (MIAVR) have emerged as alternatives to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) via traditional sternotomy. However, their effect on clinical practice remains unclear. The study's objective is to describe clinical trends between TAVR, MIAVR and SAVR in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS). METHODS: This retrospective observational study analyzed trends in isolated severe aortic valve replacement (AVR) among three high volume TAVR, MIAVR and SAVR centres in the United States. The cohort included 2571 patients from 2011 through 2014 undergoing SAVR ( n = 842), MIAVR ( n = 699) and TAVR ( n = 1030) further stratified into transapical (TA-TAVR) and trans-femoral (TF-TAVR). RESULTS: Total AVR volume increased +107% with increases in TF-TAVR (+595%) and MIAVR (+57%). However, SAVR (-15%) and TA-TAVR (-49%) decreased from 2013 to 2014. In the final year, risk stratification by age ≥ 80, redo AVR, patients receiving dialysis and STS score >8% revealed increases in TF-TAVR and MIAVR, while SAVR decreased for all groups. CONCLUSIONS: TF-TAVR and MIAVR increased while SAVR and TA-TAVR trended down in the latter periods, which underscore a paradigm shift in the treatment of severe AS and the importance of surgeon adoption of TF-TAVR and MIAVR techniques. As the demand for minimally invasive modalities increases, further studies comparing MIAVR versus TF-TAVR in low and intermediate risk patients are warranted. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery 2017. This work is written by US Government employees and is in the public domain in the US.
Authors: Paolo Berretta; Mariano Cefarelli; Walter Vessella; Michele D Pierri; Roberto Carozza; Giulia Abramucci; Christopher Munch; Hossein M Zahedi; Marco Di Eusanio Journal: J Vis Surg Date: 2018-05-08
Authors: Sameer A Hirji; Fernando Ramirez-Del Val; Ahmed A Kolkailah; Julius I Ejiofor; Siobhan McGurk; Ritam Chowdhury; Jiyae Lee; Pinak B Shah; Piotr S Sobieszczyk; Sary F Aranki; Marc P Pelletier; Prem S Shekar; Tsuyoshi Kaneko Journal: Ann Cardiothorac Surg Date: 2017-09
Authors: Anna Olds; Siavash Saadat; Anthony Azzolini; Viktor Dombrovskiy; Karen Odroniec; Anthony Lemaire; Aziz Ghaly; Leonard Y Lee Journal: J Cardiothorac Surg Date: 2019-05-09 Impact factor: 1.637
Authors: Ahmed Sayed; Salma Almotawally; Karim Wilson; Malak Munir; Ahmed Bendary; Ahmed Ramzy; Sameer Hirji; Abdelrahman Ibrahim Abushouk Journal: Open Heart Date: 2021-01
Authors: Mathew P Doyle; Kei Woldendorp; Martin Ng; Michael P Vallely; Michael K Wilson; Tristan D Yan; Paul G Bannon Journal: J Thorac Dis Date: 2021-03 Impact factor: 3.005
Authors: Paolo Berretta; Michele Galeazzi; Mariano Cefarelli; Jacopo Alfonsi; Veronica De Angelis; Michele Danilo Pierri; Sacha M L Matteucci; Eugenio Alessandroni; Carlo Zingaro; Filippo Capestro; Alessandro D'Alfonso; Marco Di Eusanio Journal: Indian J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2021-12-06