Transcatheter and Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients with Recent Acute Heart Failure

Background. Patients with severe aortic stenosis and heart failure have poor prognosis, and their outcomes may be suboptimal even after transcatheter (TAVR) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). Methods. This is an analysis of the nationwide FinnValve registry, which included patients who underwent primary TAVR or SAVR with a bioprothesis for aortic stenosis. We evaluated the outcome of patients with acute heart failure (AHF) within 60 days prior to TAVR or SAVR. Results. The prevalence of recent AHF was 11.4% (484 of 4241 patients) in the SAVR cohort and 11.3% (210 of 1855 patients) in the TAVR cohort. In the SAVR cohort, AHF was associated with lower 30-day survival (91.3% vs 97.0%; adjusted odds ratio 1.801, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.125-2.882) and 5-year survival (64.0% vs 81.2%; adjusted hazard ratio 1.482, 95% CI 1.207-1.821). SAVR patients with AHF had higher risk of major bleeding, need of mechanical circulatory support, acute kidney injury, prolonged hospital stay, and composite end-point (30-day mortality, stroke and/or acute kidney injury). Patients with AHF had a trend toward lower 30-day survival (crude rates 95.2% vs 97.9%; adjusted odds ratio 2.028, 95% CI 0.908-4.529) as well as significantly lower 5-year survival (crude rates 45.3% vs 58.5%; adjusted hazard ratio 1.530, 95% CI 1.185-1.976) also after TAVR. AHF increased the risk of acute kidney injury, prolonged hospital stay, and composite end-point after TAVR. Conclusions. Recent AHF is associated with increased risk of mortality and morbidity after SAVR and TAVR. These findings suggest that aortic stenosis patients should be referred for invasive treatment before the development of clinically evident heart failure.Peer reviewe

Five-year outcomes of transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement or surgical aortic valve replacement in a real world population final results from the OBSERVANT study

Abstract Background: The OBSERVANT study (Observational Study of Effectiveness of SAVR–TAVI Procedures for Severe Aortic Stenosis Treatment) showed that mortality at 1 year is similar after transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for real-world propensity-matched patients with aortic stenosis at low and intermediate risk. We report the 5-year outcomes of the Italian OBSERVANT study. Methods and Results: The unadjusted enrolled population (N=7618) between December 2010 and June 2012 included 5707 patients on SAVR and 1911 patients on TAVR. The propensity score method was applied to select 2 groups with similar baseline characteristics. All outcomes were adjudicated through a linkage with administrative databases. The primary end points of this analysis were death from any cause and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events at 5 years. The matched population had a total of 1300 patients (650 per group). The propensity score method generated a low and intermediate-risk population (mean logistic EuroSCORE 2: 5.1±6.2% versus 4.9±5.1%, SAVR versus transfemoral TAVR; P=0.485). At 5 years, the rate of 5 death from any cause was 35.8% in the surgical group and 48.3% in the transcatheter group (hazard ratio, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.12–1.69; P=0.002). Similarly, TAVR was associated with an increased risk of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events as compared with SAVR (42.5% versus 54.0%; hazard ratio, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.11–1.63; P=0.003). The cumulative incidence of cerebrovascular events, myocardial infarction, and coronary revascularization were similar in the study groups at 5 years. Conclusions: The present results suggest that at 5 years, in a real-world population with severe aortic stenosis and at low and intermediate risk, suggest that SAVR is associated in with lower mortality and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events rates than transfemoral TAVR performed using first-generation devices. These data need to be confirmed in randomized trials using new-generation TAVR devices

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation compared with surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with anaemia

Abstract Objectives: We compared the outcome of anaemic patients undergoing transcatheter (TAVI) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for severe aortic valve stenosis. Methods: Anaemic patients (haemoglobin <13.0 g/dL in men and <12.0 g/dL in women) undergoing TAVI and SAVR from the OBSERVANT study were the subjects of this analysis. Results: Preoperative anaemia was an independent predictor of 3-year mortality after either TAVI (HR 1.37, 95% CI 1.12–1.68) and SAVR (HR 1.63, 95% CI 1.37–1.99). Propensity score matching resulted in 302 pairs with similar characteristics. Patients undergoing SAVR had similar 30-d mortality (3.6% versus 3.3%, p = .81) and stroke (1.3% versus 2.0%, p = .53) compared with TAVI. The rates of pacemaker implantation (18.6% versus 3.0%, p < .001), major vascular damage (5.7% versus 0.4%, p < .001) and mild-to-severe paravalvular regurgitation (47.4% versus 9.3%, p < .001) were higher after TAVI, whereas acute kidney injury (50.7% versus 27.9%, p < .001) and blood transfusion (70.0% versus 38.6%, p < .001) were more frequent after SAVR. At 3-year, survival was 74.0% after SAVR and 66.3% after TAVI, respectively (p = .065), and freedom from MACCE was 67.6% after SAVR and 58.7% after TAVI, respectively (p = .049). Conclusions: These results suggest that TAVI is not superior to SAVR in patients with anaemia

Early and late outcomes after transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in obese patients

Abstract Introduction:Data on the early and late outcome following transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in obese patients are limited. We investigated whether TAVI may be superior to SAVR in obese patients. Material and methods:Obese patients (body mass index ≥ 30 kg/m²) who underwent either SAVR or TAVI were identified from the nationwide OBSERVANT registry, and their in-hospital and long-term outcomes were analysed. Propensity score matching was employed to identify two cohorts with similar baseline characteristics. Results:The propensity score matching provided 142 pairs balanced in terms of baseline risk factors. In-hospital and 30-day mortality did not differ between SAVR and TAVI obese patients (4.6% vs. 3.3%, p = 0.56, and 5.2% vs. 3.2%, p = 0.41, respectively). Obese SAVR patients experienced a higher rate of renal failure (12.4% vs. 3.6%, p = 0.0105) and blood transfusion requirement (60.3% vs. 25.7%, p < 0.0001) in comparison with TAVI patients. A higher rate of permanent pacemaker implantation (14.4% vs. 3.6%, p = 0.0018), and major vascular injuries (7.4% vs. 0%, p = 0.0044) occurred in the TAVI group. Five-year survival was higher in the SAVR group compared to the TAVI patient cohort (p = 0.0046), with survival estimates at 1, 3 and 5 years of 88.0%, 80.3%, 71.8% for patients undergoing SAVR, and 85.2%, 69.0%, 52.8% for those subjected to TAVI procedures. Conclusions:In obese patients, both SAVR and TAVI are valid treatment options, although in the long term SAVR exhibited higher survival rates

One-year outcomes after surgical versus transcatheter aortic valve replacement with newer generation devices

Abstract The superiority of transcatheter (TAVR) over surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for severe aortic stenosis (AS) has not been fully demonstrated in a real-world setting. This prospective study included 5706 AS patients who underwent SAVR from 2010 to 2012 and 2989 AS patients who underwent TAVR from 2017 to 2018 from the prospective multicenter observational studies OBSERVANT I and II. Early adverse events as well as all-cause mortality, major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs), and hospital readmission due to heart failure at 1-year were investigated. Among 1008 propensity score matched pairs, TAVR was associated with significantly lower 30-day mortality (1.8 vs. 3.5%, p = 0.020), stroke (0.8 vs. 2.3%, p = 0.005), and acute kidney injury (0.6 vs. 8.2%, p < 0.001) compared to SAVR. Moderate-to-severe paravalvular regurgitation (5.9 vs. 2.0%, p < 0.001) and permanent pacemaker implantation (13.8 vs. 3.3%, p < 0.001) were more frequent after TAVR. At 1-year, TAVR was associated with lower risk of all-cause mortality (7.9 vs. 11.5%, p = 0.006), MACCE (12.0 vs. 15.8%, p = 0.011), readmission due to heart failure (10.8 vs. 15.9%, p < 0.001), and stroke (3.2 vs. 5.1%, p = 0.033) compared to SAVR. TAVR reduced 1-year mortality in the subgroups of patients aged 80 years or older (HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.33–0.71), in females (HR 0.57, 0.38–0.85), and among patients with EuroSCORE II ≥ 4.0% (HR 0.48, 95% CI 0.32–0.71). In a real-world setting, TAVR using new-generation devices was associated with lower rates of adverse events up to 1-year follow-up compared to SAVR

Mid-term outcomes of Sapien 3 versus Perimount Magna Ease for treatment of severe aortic stenosis

Abstract Background: There is limited information on the longer-term outcome after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with new-generation prostheses compared to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). The aim of this study was to compare the mid-term outcomes after TAVR with Sapien 3 and SAVR with Perimount Magna Ease bioprostheses for severe aortic stenosis. Methods: In a retrospective study, we included patients who underwent transfemoral TAVR with Sapien 3 or SAVR with Perimount Magna Ease bioprosthesis between January 2008 and October 2017 from the nationwide FinnValve registry. Propensity score matching was performed to adjust for differences in the baseline characteristics. The Kaplan-Meir method was used to estimate late mortality. Results: A total of 2000 patients were included (689 in the TAVR cohort and 1311 in the SAVR cohort). Propensity score matching resulted in 308 pairs (STS score, TAVR 3.5 ± 2.2% vs. SAVR 3.5 ± 2.8%, p = 0.918). In-hospital mortality was 3.6% after SAVR and 1.3% after TAVR (p = 0.092). Stroke, acute kidney injury, bleeding and atrial fibrillation were significantly more frequent after SAVR, but higher rate of vascular complications was observed after TAVR. The cumulative incidence of permanent pacemaker implantation at 4 years was 13.9% in the TAVR group and 6.9% in the SAVR group (p = 0.0004). At 4-years, all-cause mortality was 20.6% for SAVR and 25.9% for TAVR (p = 0.910). Four-year rates of coronary revascularization, prosthetic valve endocarditis and repeat aortic valve intervention were similar between matched cohorts. Conclusions: The Sapien 3 bioprosthesis achieves comparable midterm outcomes to a surgical bioprosthesis with proven durability such as the Perimount Magna Ease. However, the Sapien 3 bioprosthesis was associated with better early outcome

Comparison of outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement vs surgical aortic valve replacement among patients with aortic stenosis at low operative risk

Abstract Importance: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has been shown to be a valid alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients at high operative risk with severe aortic stenosis (AS). However, the evidence of the benefits and harms of TAVR in patients at low operative risk is still scarce. Objective: To compare the short-term and midterm outcomes after TAVR and SAVR in low-risk patients with AS. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective comparative effectiveness cohort study used data from the Nationwide Finnish Registry of Transcatheter and Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement for Aortic Valve Stenosis of patients at low operative risk who underwent TAVR or SAVR with a bioprosthesis for severe AS from January 1, 2008, to November 30, 2017. Low operative risk was defined as a Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality score less than 3% without other comorbidities of clinical relevance. One-to-one propensity score matching was performed to adjust for baseline covariates between the TAVR and SAVR cohorts. Exposures: Primary TAVR or SAVR with a bioprosthesis for AS with or without associated coronary revascularization. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were 30-day and 3-year survival. Results: Overall, 2841 patients (mean [SD] age, 74.0 [6.2] years; 1560 [54.9%] men) fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis; TAVR was performed in 325 patients and SAVR in 2516 patients. Propensity score matching produced 304 pairs with similar baseline characteristics. Third-generation devices were used in 263 patients (86.5%) who underwent TAVR. Among these matched pairs, 30-day mortality was 1.3% after TAVR and 3.6% after SAVR (P = .12). Three-year survival was similar in the study cohorts (TAVR, 85.7%; SAVR, 87.7%; P = .45). Interaction tests found no differences in terms of 3-year survival between the study cohorts in patients younger than vs older than 80 years or in patients who received recent aortic valve prostheses vs those who did not. Conclusions and Relevance: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement using mostly third-generation devices achieved similar short- and mid-term survival compared with SAVR in low-risk patients. Further studies are needed to assess the long-term durability of TAVR prostheses before extending their use to low-risk patients

Prediction of severe bleeding after coronary surgery:the WILL-BLEED Risk Score

Abstract Severe perioperative bleeding after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is associated with poor outcome. An additive score for prediction of severe bleeding was derived (n=2494) and validated (n=1250) in patients from the E-CABG registry. Severe bleeding was defined as E-CABG bleeding grades 2–3 (transfusion of >4 units of red blood cells or reoperation for bleeding). The overall incidence of severe bleeding was 6.4 %. Preoperative anaemia (3 points), female gender (2 points), eGFR <45 ml/min/1.73 m² (3 points), potent antiplatelet drugs discontinued less than five days (2 points), critical preoperative state (5 points), acute coronary syndrome (2 points), use of low-molecular-weight heparin/fondaparinux/unfractionated heparin (1 point) were independent predictors of severe bleeding. The WILL-BLEED score was associated with increasing rates of severe bleeding in both the derivation and validation cohorts (scores 0–3: 2.9 % vs 3.4 %; scores 4–6: 6.8 % vs 7.5 %; scores>6: 24.6 % vs 24.2 %, both p<0.0001). The WILL-BLEED score had a better discriminatory ability (AUC 0.725) for prediction of severe bleeding compared to the ACTION (AUC 0.671), CRUSADE (AUC 0.642), Papworth (AUC 0.605), TRUST (AUC 0.660) and TRACK (AUC 0.640) bleeding scores. The net reclassification index and integrated discrimination improvement using the WILL-BLEED score as opposed to the other bleeding scores were significant (p<0.0001). The decision curve analysis demonstrated a net benefit with the WILL-BLEED score compared to the other bleeding scores. In conclusion, the WILL-BLEED risk score is a simple risk stratification method which allows the identification of patients at high risk of severe bleeding after CABG

Variation in preoperative antithrombotic strategy, severe bleeding, and use of blood products in coronary artery bypass grafting:results from the multicentre E-CABG registry

Abstract Aims: No data exists on inter-institutional differences in terms of adherence to international guidelines regarding the discontinuation of antithrombotics and rates of severe bleeding in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Methods and results: This is an analysis of 7118 patients from the prospective multicentre European CABG (E-CABG) registry who underwent isolated CABG in 15 European centres. Preoperative pause of P2Y12 receptor antagonists shorter than that suggested by the 2017 ESC guidelines (overall 11.6%) ranged from 0.7% to 24.8% between centres (adjusted P < 0.0001) and increased the rate of severe-massive bleeding [E-CABG bleeding grades 2–3, OR 1.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.27–2.17; Universal Definition of Perioperative Bleeding (UDPB) bleeding grades 3–4, OR 1.50, 95% CI 1.16–1.93]. The incidence of resternotomy for bleeding (overall 2.6%) ranged from 0% to 6.9% (adjusted P < 0.0001), and surgical site bleeding (overall 59.6%) ranged from 0% to 84.6% (adjusted P = 0.003). The rate of the UDPB bleeding grades 3–4 (overall 8.4%) ranged from 3.7% to 22.3% (P < 0.0001), and of the E-CABG bleeding grades 2–3 (overall 6.5%) ranged from 0.4% to 16.4% between centres (P < 0.0001). Resternotomy for bleeding (adjusted OR 5.04, 95% CI 2.85–8.92), UDPB bleeding grades 3–4 (adjusted OR 6.61, 95% CI 4.42–9.88), and E-CABG bleeding grades 2–3 (adjusted OR 8.71, 95% CI 5.76–13.15) were associated with an increased risk of hospital/30-day mortality. Conclusions: Adherence to the current guidelines on the early discontinuation of P2Y12 receptor antagonists is of utmost importance to reduce excessive bleeding and early mortality after CABG. Inter-institutional variation should be considered for a correct interpretation of the results in multicentre studies evaluating perioperative bleeding and use of blood products