Literature DB >> 30445543

Patients at low surgical risk as defined by the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Score undergoing isolated interventional or surgical aortic valve implantation: in-hospital data and 1-year results from the German Aortic Valve Registry (GARY).

Raffi Bekeredjian1,2, Gabor Szabo3, Ümniye Balaban4,5, Sabine Bleiziffer6, Timm Bauer7, Stephan Ensminger8, Christian Frerker9, Eva Herrmann4,5, Friedhelm Beyersdorf10, Christian Hamm11, Andreas Beckmann12, Helge Möllmann13, Matthias Karck3, Hugo A Katus1, Thomas Walther14.   

Abstract

AIMS: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has become the standard treatment for patients with severe aortic valve stenosis at high surgical risk and may be considered for patients with intermediate risk. During the last few years, an increasing number of patients with low surgical risk have been treated with TAVI. In this study, low-risk patients undergoing isolated TAVI or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) were analysed using data from the German Aortic Valve Registry (GARY). METHODS AND
RESULTS: All patients with a Society of Thoracic Surgeons Score of <4% undergoing TAVI or SAVR in 2014 and 2015 were evaluated. A total of 20 549 low surgical risk patients remained for further analysis, comprising 14 487 surgical patients and 6062 TAVI patients. Since TAVI patients were significantly older and had significantly more co-morbidities, a weighted propensity score model was used to compare SAVR and TAVI patients for in-hospital, 30-day, and 1-year mortality. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation patients showed a significantly higher in-hospital and 30-day survival than SAVR patients (in hospital survival TAVI vs. SAVR: 98.5% vs. 97.3%; P = 0.003; 30-day survival TAVI vs. SAVR: 98.1% vs. 97.1%; P = 0.014). At 1 year, survival rates did not differ significantly (survival TAVI vs. SAVR: 90.0% vs. 91.2%; P = 0.158).
CONCLUSION: In this first GARY analysis of low-risk patients, weighted comparison showed similar 1-year survival for TAVI and SAVR and higher in-hospital survival for TAVI patients. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
© The Author(s) 2018. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Low risk; Surgical aortic valve replacement; Transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30445543     DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehy699

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Heart J        ISSN: 0195-668X            Impact factor:   29.983


  12 in total

1.  Transvascular transcatheter aortic valve implantation in 2017.

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

2.  Lower mortality in an all-comers aortic stenosis population treated with TAVI in comparison to SAVR.

Authors:  Helge Möllmann; Oliver Husser; Johannes Blumenstein; Christoph Liebetrau; Oliver Dörr; Won-Keun Kim; Holger Nef; Christian Tesche; Christian W Hamm; Albrecht Elsässer; Stephan Achenbach; Luise Gaede
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2019-10-01       Impact factor: 5.460

3.  [Transcatheter aortic valve replacement : PARTNER 3 trial and Evolut Low Risk Trial].

Authors:  C Frerker; S Baldus; S Nitschmann
Journal:  Internist (Berl)       Date:  2019-11       Impact factor: 0.743

4.  Association Between Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement for Bicuspid vs Tricuspid Aortic Stenosis and Mortality or Stroke Among Patients at Low Surgical Risk.

Authors:  Raj R Makkar; Sung-Han Yoon; Tarun Chakravarty; Samir R Kapadia; Amar Krishnaswamy; Pinak B Shah; Tsuyoshi Kaneko; Eric R Skipper; Michael Rinaldi; Vasilis Babaliaros; Sreekanth Vemulapalli; Alfredo Trento; Wen Cheng; Susheel Kodali; Michael J Mack; Martin B Leon; Vinod H Thourani
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2021-09-21       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  Comparison of surgical versus transcatheter aortic valve replacement for patients with aortic stenosis at low-intermediate risk.

Authors:  Mahin R Khan; Waleed T Kayani; Malalai Manan; Ahmad Munir; Ihab Hamzeh; Salim S Virani; Yochai Birnbaum; Hani Jneid; Mahboob Alam
Journal:  Cardiovasc Diagn Ther       Date:  2020-04

6.  Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients with previous mitral valve replacement. A systematic study.

Authors:  Zbigniew Chmielak; Maciej Dąbrowski; Paweł Tyczyński; Krzysztof Kukuła; Ilona Michałowska; Emilia Szudejko; Jarosław Skowroński; Mariusz Kuśmierczyk; Adam Witkowski
Journal:  Postepy Kardiol Interwencyjnej       Date:  2020-06-23       Impact factor: 1.426

Review 7.  Current results and remaining challenges of trans-catheter aortic valve replacement expansion in intermediate and low risk patients.

Authors:  Alfonso Ielasi; Azeem Latib; Maurizio Tespili; Francesco Donatelli
Journal:  Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc       Date:  2019-05-15

8.  Micro-dislodgement during transcatheter aortic valve implantation with a contemporary self-expandable prosthesis.

Authors:  Katharina Hellhammer; Kerstin Piayda; Shazia Afzal; Verena Veulemans; Inga Hennig; Matthias Makosch; Amin Polzin; Malte Kelm; Tobias Zeus
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-11-07       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 9.  Advances in Clinical Cardiology 2018: A Summary of Key Clinical Trials.

Authors:  Katie Linden; Conor McQuillan; Paul Brennan; Ian B A Menown
Journal:  Adv Ther       Date:  2019-05-07       Impact factor: 3.845

10.  Long-term Outcomes Associated With Permanent Pacemaker Implantation After Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement.

Authors:  Natalie Glaser; Michael Persson; Magnus Dalén; Ulrik Sartipy
Journal:  JAMA Netw Open       Date:  2021-07-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.