Literature DB >> 29268936

Comparison of Outcomes of Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease.

Nilay Kumar1, Rohan Khera2, Neetika Garg3, Justin B Echouffo-Tcheugui4, Anand Venkatraman5, Ambarish Pandey2, Deepak L Bhatt6.   

Abstract

There are few data comparing outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients with chronic kidney disease. In this retrospective cohort study using the National Inpatient Sample 2011 to 2014, we included a total of 2,820 TAVI and 4,054 SAVR procedures, representative of 14,039 TAVI and 19,835 SAVR procedures nationally. Co-primary outcomes were in-hospital mortality, acute kidney injury (AKI), dialysis-requiring AKI, and postoperative stroke. In multivariate analysis, TAVI was associated with a lower in-hospital mortality (odds ratio [OR] 0.47, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.32 to 0.69, p < 0.001), rates of AKI (OR 0.18, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.22, p < 0.001), dialysis-requiring AKI (OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.44, p < 0.001), and postoperative stroke (OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.53, p < 0.001) compared with SAVR. In 1001 propensity-matched pairs of TAVI and SAVR procedures, TAVI was associated with lower in-hospital mortality (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.99, p = 0.047) rates of AKI (OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.46, p < 0.001), dialysis-requiring AKI (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.81, p < 0.001), postoperative stroke (OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.98, p = 0.045), significantly shorter length of stay (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.42, p < 0.001), and nonsignificant difference in cost (OR 1.05, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.26, p = 0.57) compared with SAVR. In conclusion, TAVI may be a preferable approach to SAVR in patients with severe aortic stenosis in the setting of chronic kidney disease.
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29268936     DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2017.10.029

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Cardiol        ISSN: 0002-9149            Impact factor:   2.778


  5 in total

1.  Propensity matched comparison of TAVI and SAVR in intermediate-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis and moderate-to-severe chronic kidney disease: a subgroup analysis from the German Aortic Valve Registry.

Authors:  Stephan Fichtlscherer; Thomas Walther; Silvia Mas-Peiro; Gloria Faerber; Dimitra Bon; Eva Herrmann; Timm Bauer; Sabine Bleiziffer; Raffi Bekeredjian; Andreas Böning; Christian Frerker; Andreas Beckmann; Helge Möllmann; Stephan Ensminger; Christian W Hamm; Friedhelm Beyersdorf
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2022-09-08       Impact factor: 6.138

2.  Management of Aortic Stenosis in Patients With End-Stage Renal Disease on Hemodialysis.

Authors:  Amgad Mentias; Milind Y Desai; Marwan Saad; Phillip A Horwitz; James D Rossen; Sidakpal Panaich; Hani Jneid; Samir Kapadia; Mary Vaughan-Sarrazin
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2020-08-10       Impact factor: 6.546

Review 3.  Acute kidney injury after transcatheter aortic valve replacement in the elderly: outcomes and risk management.

Authors:  Marta Zaleska-Kociecka; Maciej Dabrowski; Janina Stepinska
Journal:  Clin Interv Aging       Date:  2019-01-21       Impact factor: 4.458

Review 4.  Advances in transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

Authors:  Tomo Ando; Alexandros Briasoulis; Sidakpal Panaich
Journal:  J Geriatr Cardiol       Date:  2019-09       Impact factor: 3.327

5.  Clinical outcomes and cumulative healthcare costs of TAVR vs. SAVR in Asia.

Authors:  Elise Chia-Hui Tan; Yung-Tsai Lee; Yu Chen Kuo; Tien-Ping Tsao; Kuo-Chen Lee; Ming-Chon Hsiung; Jeng Wei; Kuan-Chia Lin; Wei-Hsian Yin
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2022-09-21
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.