A Ak1, I Porokhovnikov1, F Kuethe2, P C Schulze2, M Noutsias2, P Schlattmann3. 1. Institute of Medical Statistics, Informatics and Documentation (IMSID), Friedrich-Schiller University and University Hospital Jena, Bachstraße 18, 07743, Jena, Germany. 2. Department of Internal Medicine I, Division of Cardiology, Pneumology, Angiology and Intensive Medical Care, University Hospital Jena, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena, Jena, Germany. 3. Institute of Medical Statistics, Informatics and Documentation (IMSID), Friedrich-Schiller University and University Hospital Jena, Bachstraße 18, 07743, Jena, Germany. peter.schlattmann@med.uni-jena.de.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has emerged as the procedure of choice for patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) and high perioperative risk. We performed a meta-analysis to compare the mortality related to TAVR with medical therapy (MT) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted by two independent investigators from the database inception to 30 December 2014. Relative risk (RR) and odds ratio (OR) were calculated and graphically displayed in forest plots. We used I 2 for heterogeneity (meta-regression) and Egger's regression test of asymmetry (funnel plots). RESULTS: We included 24 studies (n = 19 observational studies; n = 5 randomized controlled trials), with a total of 7356 patients in this meta-analysis. Mean age had a substantial negative impact on the long-term survival of AS patients (OR = 1.544; 95% CI: 1.25-1.90). Compared with MT, TAVR showed a statistically significant benefit for all-cause mortality at 12 months (OR = 0.68; 95% CI: 0.49-0.95). Both TAVR and SAVR were associated with better outcomes compared with MT. TAVR showed lower all-cause mortality over SAVR at 12 months (OR = 0.81; 95% CI: 0.68-0.97). The comparison between SAVR and TAVR at 2 years revealed no significant difference (OR = 1.09; 95% CI: 1.01-1.17). CONCLUSION: In AS, both TAVR and SAVR provide a superior prognosis to MT and, therefore, MT is not the preferred treatment option for AS. Furthermore, our data show that TAVR is associated with lower mortality at 12 months compared with SAVR. Further studies are warranted to compare the long-term outcome of TAVR versus SAVR beyond a 2-year follow-up period.
BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has emerged as the procedure of choice for patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) and high perioperative risk. We performed a meta-analysis to compare the mortality related to TAVR with medical therapy (MT) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted by two independent investigators from the database inception to 30 December 2014. Relative risk (RR) and odds ratio (OR) were calculated and graphically displayed in forest plots. We used I 2 for heterogeneity (meta-regression) and Egger's regression test of asymmetry (funnel plots). RESULTS: We included 24 studies (n = 19 observational studies; n = 5 randomized controlled trials), with a total of 7356 patients in this meta-analysis. Mean age had a substantial negative impact on the long-term survival of AS patients (OR = 1.544; 95% CI: 1.25-1.90). Compared with MT, TAVR showed a statistically significant benefit for all-cause mortality at 12 months (OR = 0.68; 95% CI: 0.49-0.95). Both TAVR and SAVR were associated with better outcomes compared with MT. TAVR showed lower all-cause mortality over SAVR at 12 months (OR = 0.81; 95% CI: 0.68-0.97). The comparison between SAVR and TAVR at 2 years revealed no significant difference (OR = 1.09; 95% CI: 1.01-1.17). CONCLUSION: In AS, both TAVR and SAVR provide a superior prognosis to MT and, therefore, MT is not the preferred treatment option for AS. Furthermore, our data show that TAVR is associated with lower mortality at 12 months compared with SAVR. Further studies are warranted to compare the long-term outcome of TAVR versus SAVR beyond a 2-year follow-up period.
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: Alain Cribier; Helene Eltchaninoff; Assaf Bash; Nicolas Borenstein; Christophe Tron; Fabrice Bauer; Genevieve Derumeaux; Frederic Anselme; François Laborde; Martin B Leon Journal: Circulation Date: 2002-12-10 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Fenton H McCarthy; Nimesh D Desai; Howard C Herrmann; Dale Kobrin; Prashanth Vallabhajosyula; Zachary Fox; Rohan Menon; John G Augoustides; Jay S Giri; Saif Anwaruddin; Robert H Li; Dinesh H Jagasia; Joseph E Bavaria; Wilson Y Szeto Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2014-08-19 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: F Schwarz; P Baumann; J Manthey; M Hoffmann; G Schuler; H C Mehmel; W Schmitz; W Kübler Journal: Circulation Date: 1982-11 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Christophe Dubois; Mark Coosemans; Filip Rega; Gert Poortmans; Ann Belmans; Tom Adriaenssens; Marie-Christine Herregods; Kaatje Goetschalckx; Walter Desmet; Stefan Janssens; Bart Meyns; Paul Herijgers Journal: Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg Date: 2013-05-23
Authors: Kevin L Greason; Verghese Mathew; Rakesh M Suri; David R Holmes; Charanjit S Rihal; Tom McAndrew; Ke Xu; Michael Mack; John G Webb; Augusto Pichard; Mathew Williams; Martin B Leon; Lars Svensson; Vinod Thourani; Craig R Smith Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2014-06-02 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Christopher Cao; Su C Ang; Praveen Indraratna; Con Manganas; Paul Bannon; Deborah Black; David Tian; Tristan D Yan Journal: Ann Cardiothorac Surg Date: 2013-01
Authors: Maisha M Khan; Krista L Lanctôt; Stephen E Fremes; Harindra C Wijeysundera; Sam Radhakrishnan; Damien Gallagher; Dov Gandell; Megan C Brenkel; Elias L Hazan; Natalia G Docteur; Nathan Herrmann Journal: Clin Interv Aging Date: 2019-05-08 Impact factor: 4.458