Transcatheter aortic valve replacement outcomes in patients with high gradient versus low ejection fraction low gradient severe aortic stenosis: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: The outcome of Low Flow-Low Gradient (LF-LG) severe aortic stenosis (AS) patients who underwent Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement (TAVR) procedure is not well defined. We conducted a systematic review of the literature to compare the outcomes of TAVR in LF-LG AS patients to the more traditional high gradient (HG) aortic stenosis. METHODS: We comprehensively searched for controlled randomized and non-randomized studies from 4 online databases. We are presenting the data using risk ratios (95 % confidence intervals) and measuring heterogeneity using Higgins' I2 index. RESULTS: Our analysis included 4380 patients with 3425 HG patients and 955 LF-LG patients from 6 cohort (5 retrospective and 1 prospective) studies. When compared to LFLG; TAVR was associated with significantly lower 30 days mortality in HG patients (5.1 % vs 7.4 %; relative risk [RR]: 0.55; 95 % confidence interval [CI]: 0.35 to 0.86; p < 0.01). Similar findings were also observed in 12-month cardiovascular (CV) mortality (5.5 % vs. 10.4 %; RR: 0.47; 95 % CI: 0.38 to 0.60; p < 0.01 and 12-month all-cause mortality (15.9 % vs 20.9 %; RR: 0.70; 95 % CI: 0.49 to 1.00; p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in myocardial infarction (MI) after TAVR between HG and LF-LG at 30 days (0.16 % vs. 0.95 %; p < 0.09) or 12 months (0.43 % vs. 0.95 %; p = 0.20). Similarly, there was no difference in stroke rates at 30 days (2.9 % vs. 2.86 %) or at 12 months (3.6 % vs. 3.06 %). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Patients with LF-LG severe AS who underwent TAVR had worse 1-year all-cause mortality, 30-day all-cause, and 1-year CV mortality when compared to TAVR in HG severe AS. There was no difference in MI or stroke rates. Therefore, with heart team discussion and informed patient decision regarding the risk and benefit, TAVR would still offer better outcomes in LFLG AS compared to conservative medical management.

Transcarotid versus transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: In the 2021 Transcatheter Valve Therapy (TVT) registry, 8.9 % of patients underwent TAVR via access sites other than the femoral artery. Transthoracic approaches may be contraindicated in some patients and may be associated with poorer outcomes. Therefore other alternative access routes are increasingly being performed. We conducted a systematic review of the literature on transcarotid transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TC-TAVR) and meta-analysis comparing outcomes of TC-TAVR and other access routes. METHODS: We comprehensively searched for controlled randomized and non-randomized studies from 4 online databases. We presented data using risk ratios (95 % confidence intervals) and measured heterogeneity using Higgins' I2. RESULTS: Sixteen observational studies on transcarotid TAVR were included in the analysis; 4 studies compared TC-TAVR vs TF-TAVR. The mean age and STS score for patients undergoing TC-TAVR were 80 years and 7.6 respectively. For TF-TAVR patients, mean age and STS score were 81.2 years and 6.5 respectively. There was no difference between patients undergoing TC-TAVR and TF-TAVR in the following 30-day outcomes: MACE [8.4 % vs 6.7 %; OR 1.32 (95 % CI 0.71-2.46 p = 0.38) I2 = 0 %], mortality [5.6 % vs 4.0 %; OR 0.42 (95 % CI 0.60-3.37, P = 0.42) I2 = 0 %] and stroke [0.7 % vs 2.3 %; OR 0.49 (95 % CI 0.09-2.56, P = 0.40) I2 = 0 %]. There was no difference in 30-day major vascular complications [0.7 % vs 3 %; OR 0.55 (95 % CI 0.06-5.29, P = 0.61) I2 = 39 %], major bleeding [0.7 % vs 3.8 %; OR 0.39 (95 % CI 0.09-1.67, P = 0.21) I2 = 0 %], and moderate or severe aortic valve regurgitation [8.6 % vs 9.9 %; OR 0.89 (95 % CI 0.48-1.65, P = 0.72) I2 = 0 %]. CONCLUSION: There are no significant differences in mortality, stroke MACE and major or life-threatening bleeding or vascular complications when TC-TAVR is compared to TF-TAVR approaches.

Transcarotid versus transthoracic transcatheter aortic valve replacement: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Transthoracic approaches may be contraindicated in some patients and may be associated with poorer outcomes. Therefore other alternative access routes are increasingly being performed. We conducted a systematic review of the literature on Transcarotid transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TC-TAVR) and meta-analysis comparing outcomes of TC-TAVR and other access routes. METHODS: We comprehensively searched for controlled randomized and non-randomized studies from 4 online databases. We presented data using risk ratios (95 % confidence intervals) and measured heterogeneity using Higgins' I2. RESULTS: Sixteen observational studies on Transcarotid TAVR were included in the analysis; 4 studies compared 180 TC-TAVR patients vs 524 TT-TAVR patients. The mean age and STS score for patients undergoing TC-TAVR were 80 years and 7.6 respectively. For TT-TAVR patients, the mean age and STS score were 79.7 years and 8.7 respectively. TC-TAVR patients had lower 30-day MACE [7.8 % vs 13.7 %; OR 0.54 (95 % CI 0.29-0.99, P = 0.05)] and major or life-threatening bleeding [4.0 % vs 14.2 %; OR 0.25 (95 % CI 0.09-0.67, P = 0.006)]. There was no significant difference in 30-day: mortality [5.0 % vs 8.6 %; OR 0.61 (95 % CI 0.29-1.30, P = 0.20)], stroke or transient ischemic attack [2.8 % vs 4.0 %; OR 0.65 (95 % CI 0.25-1.73, P = 0.39)] and moderate or severe aortic valve regurgitation [5.0 % vs 4.6 %; OR 1.14. (95 % CI 0.52-2.52, P = 0.75)]. There was a trend towards fewer major vascular complications in TC-TAVR [3.0 % vs 7.8 %; OR 0.42 (95 % CI 0.16-1.12, P = 0.08)]. CONCLUSION: Compared with transthoracic TAVR, TC-TAVR patients had lower odds of 30-day MACE and life-threatening bleeding and no differences in 30-day mortality, stroke or TIA, aortic valve regurgitation.

Urgent Transcatheter Mitral Valve-in-Valve Replacement With Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Support: Case Report and Review of the Literature.

Critical mitral valve stenosis due to a failed bioprosthetic valve is associated with significant morbidity and mortality, with the transcatheter Valve-in-Valve (ViV) approach becoming a popular treatment option. We present a case of cardiogenic shock secondary to a stenotic mitral bio-prosthetic valve. The Heart team was consulted; the patient was a high-risk surgical candidate for valve replacement. He required venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation as a bridge to definitive therapy. The patient underwent a successful urgent transcatheter mitral ViV procedure with a trans-septal approach. Follow-up echocardiography showed significant improvement in mitral valve dynamics. Recently emerging transcatheter approaches for mitral ViV implantation after balloon valvuloplasty into a failed mitral valve prosthesis are technically feasible in high-risk patient populations and should be considered over re-operative mitral valve surgery.

Impella RP Use in Refractory Cardiogenic Shock in a Patient Presenting With Acute Right Coronary Artery Occlusion: A Case Report.

It is common for patients with inferior myocardial infarction to experience right ventricular infarction, occurring in half of the patients with inferior myocardial infarction. Right ventricular failure due to acute right myocardial infarction is often associated with a worse prognosis. In this case, we report a patient with acute chest pain due to acute right coronary artery occlusion status post placement of multiple stents in the right coronary artery. Unfortunately, he developed refractory cardiogenic shock requiring biventricular assist device placement.

Prosthetic Aortic Valve Endocarditis Creeping Into the Paravalvular Space.

Prosthetic valve endocarditis is a devastating infection with a challenging diagnosis and management. Despite advances in its diagnostic modalities, medical, and surgical interventions, prosthetic valve endocarditis still carries high morbidity and mortality rates. Here, we report a case of prosthetic aortic valve endocarditis that progressed to involve the paravalvular space and the importance of multimodality cardiac imaging in the early detection of paravalvular complications.

USMLE step 1 pass/fail: The impact on international medical graduates.

On February 12th, 2020, and after a yearlong discussion, the National Board of Medical Examiners (NBME) announced that the reporting of the U.S. Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) step one exam will transition to pass/fail reporting system and is expected to kick in as early as 2022. The decision was met with various responses, especially by the IMG community. In this paper, we discuss this change and its effect on IMG trainees and their selection process.

Percutaneous approaches for retrieval of an embolized or malpositioned left atrial appendage closure device: A multicenter experience.

BACKGROUND: Experience with retrieval of a Watchman left atrial (LA) appendage (LAA) closure device (WD) is limited. An embolized or grossly malpositioned WD warrants retrieval to minimize the risk of thromboembolic complications and vascular occlusion. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to report approaches for percutaneous retrieval of a WD from multicenter experience. METHODS: Data on successful WD retrievals were obtained from high-volume operators. Data included clinical characteristics; structural characteristics of the LA and LAA; and procedural details of the deployment and retrieval procedure, type of retrieval (immediate: during the same procedure; delayed: during a separate procedure after the successful deployment), equipment used, complications, and postretrieval management. RESULTS: Ten successful percutaneous and 1 surgical retrievals comprised this study. Seven patients had immediate retrieval, while 4 had delayed retrieval. The median duration before delayed retrieval was 45 days (range 1-45 days). The median LAA diameter and size of a successfully deployed WD was 16 mm (range 14-24 mm) and 21 mm (range 21-30 mm), respectively. A WD was retrieved from the LA (n = 1), LAA (n = 2), left ventricle (n = 2), and aorta (n = 6). The reason for retrieval from the LAA was inadequate deployment, resulting in a significant peri-device leak. Retrieval from the LA or LAA was successfully performed using snares (n = 2) and a Raptor grasping device (n = 1). Retrieval from the left ventricle was achieved with a snare (n = 1) and surgery (n = 1). Retrieval from the aorta required snares (n = 5) and retrieval forceps (n = 1). Five patients were successfully reimplanted with a larger size WD. The only complication during percutaneous retrieval was a pseudoaneurysm. CONCLUSION: Retrieval of an embolized or malpositioned WD is feasible, and familiarity with snares and grasping tools can facilitate a successful removal.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients with bicuspid aortic valve stenosis: national trends and in-hospital outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) disease is considered the most common congenital heart disease and the main etiology of aortic valve stenosis (AS) in young adults. Although transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is routinely used in high- and intermediate-risk patients with AS, BAV patients with AS were excluded from all pivotal trials that led to TAVR approval. We sought, therefore, to examine in-hospital outcomes of patients with BAV who underwent TAVR in comparison with surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). METHODS: Using the National Inpatient Sample from 2011 to 2014, we identified patients with BAV with International Classification of Diseases-Ninth Revision-CM code 746.4. Patients who underwent TAVR were identified using ICD-9 codes 35.05 and 35.06 and those who underwent SAVR were identified using codes 35.21 and 35.22 during the same period. RESULTS: A total of 37,052 patients were found to have BAV stenosis. Among them, 36,629 patients (98.8%) underwent SAVR, whereas 423 patients (1.14%) underwent TAVR. One-third of enrolled patients were female, and the majority of the patients were White with a mean age of 65.9 ± 15.1 years. TAVR use for BAV stenosis significantly increased from 0.39% in 2011 to 4.16% in 2014 (P < 0.001), which represents a 3.77% overall growth in procedure rate. The median length of stay decreased significantly throughout the study period (mean 12.2 ± 8.2 days to 7.1 ± 5.9 days, P < 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference between SAVR and TAVR groups in the in-hospital mortality (0% vs. 5.9%; adjusted P = 0.119). CONCLUSION: There is a steady increase in TAVR use for BAV stenosis patients along with a significant decrease in length of stay.

Echocardiographic Derived Parameters Association With Long-Term Outcomes After Transcatheter Valve Replacement.

BACKGROUND: Transaortic flow, maximum velocity (V max), mean gradient (MG), left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), Aortic valve area (AVA) and dimensional index (DI) are important determinants of prognosis in patients with severe aortic stenosis. The specific role of these echocardiography-derived values in predicting prognosis of severe aortic stenosis patients undergoing Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is less defined. METHODS: We identified all severe AS patients who underwent TAVR between 01/2012 and 6/2016. Baseline characteristics, clinical, procedural and one year follow-up data were obtained. Hierarchical logistic regression was used to assess predictors of 1-year mortality after TAVR. Normal flow (NF) was defined as having stroke volume index (SVI) of ≥35 ml/m2; while low Flow (LF) was defined as SVI < 35 ml/m2. High gradient (HG) was defined as mean gradient of ≥40 mmHg; while low gradient (LG) was defined as <40 mmHg. RESULTS: A total of 399 patients were analyzed. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics. LVEF less than 35% was associated with higher rate of 1-year mortality (17.6% LVEF <35% vs. 8.9% LVEF≥35%; RR = 2.19; CI 1.05 to 4.54; P = 0.03). There was no difference in 1-year mortality outcomes after TAVR in relation to: Mean Gradient MG, transaortic flow/Stroke Volume Index SVI, DI, V max or AVA. CONCLUSION: Low LVEF <35% remains the strongest parameter associated with 1 year mortality after TAVR.

Clinical Outcomes of the Dual-Therapy CD34 Antibody-Covered Sirolimus-Eluting Stent Versus Standard Drug-Eluting Coronary Stents: A Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Coronary stent neoatherosclerosis, thrombosis, and restenosis remain significant concerns with new-generation drug-eluting stents (DES). The Dual-Therapy CD34 antibody-covered sirolimus-eluting stent [dual therapy stent (DTS)] is a sirolimus-eluting stent with CD34 antibodies immobilized on its luminal surface to capture circulating endothelial progenitor cells and promote early endothelialization. We conducted a meta-analysis to determine whether the DTS was superior to standard DES. METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive search for controlled randomized and non-randomized studies. We presented data using risk ratios (95% confidence intervals) and measured heterogeneity using Higgins' I2. RESULTS: Five studies with a low risk of bias met the inclusion criteria, with a total of 1884 patients in the DTS and 1819 in standard DES arms. There was no difference between the 2 arms in the following 1-year outcomes: cardiac death [1% vs 0.9% RR 1.13 (95% CI 0.49-2.62) I2 = 0%], target lesion failure [6.2% vs 5.3% RR 1.12 (0.80-1.58) I2 = 0%], target lesion revascularization (TLR) [4.9% vs 3.4% RR 1.40 (0.93-2.10) I2 = 15%], target vessel failure [8.2% vs 6.1% RR 1.24 (0.75-2.04) I2 = 0%], target vessel myocardial infarction [1.1% vs 1.8% RR 0.73 (0.19-2.90) I2 = 62%] and stent thrombosis [0.4% vs 0.6% HR 0.85 (0.27-2.62) I2 = 0%]. However, compared with second-generation DES (EES and ZES), the DTS had significantly higher one-year TLR [5% vs. 3.1% RR 1.58 (1.02-2.46) P = 0.04 I2 = 0%]. CONCLUSION: One-year TLR was significantly higher in the DTS arm compared with second-generation DES. There was no difference in the other 1-year clinical outcomes compared with standard DES.

Clinical Outcomes of Sentinel Cerebral Protection System Use During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical outcomes following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with and without the use of the Sentinel Cerebral Protection System (Sentinel CPS). BACKGROUND: Stroke occurs in 2-5% of patients at 30 days after TAVR and increases mortality >3 fold. The Sentinel CPS is the only FDA (Food and Drug Administration) approved cerebral embolic protection device. METHODS: The Cochrane Library, PubMed and Web of Science were searched for relevant studies for inclusion in the meta-analysis. Two authors independently screened and included studies comparing the clinical outcomes after TAVR with and without the Sentinel CPS. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane tools (RoB2.0 and ROBINS-I). RESULTS: Four studies comparing 606 patients undergoing TAVR with Sentinel CPS to 724 without any embolic protection device were included. Sentinel CPS use was associated with lower rates of 30-day mortality [0.8% vs 2.7%; RR 0.34 (95% CI 0.12, 0.92) I2 = 0%], 30-day symptomatic stroke [3.5% vs 6.1%; RR 0.51 (95% CI 0.29, 0.90) I2 = 0] and major or life-threatening bleeding [3.3% vs 6.6%; RR 0.50 (0.26, 0.98) I2 = 16%]. There was no significant difference between the two arms in the incidence of acute kidney injury [0.8% vs 1%; RR 0.85 (95% CI 0.22, 3.24) I2 = 0%] and major vascular complications [5.1% vs 6%; RR 0.74 (0.33, 1.67) I2 = 45%]. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that Sentinel CPS use in TAVR is associated with a lower risk of stroke, mortality and major or life-threatening bleeding at 30 days.

Clinical Outcomes of Transcatheter vs Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Chronic Liver Disease: A Systematic Review and Metaanalysis.

Background: Chronic liver disease increases cardiac surgical risk, with 30-day mortality ranging from 9% to 52% in patients with Child-Pugh class A and C, respectively. Data comparing the outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients with liver disease are limited. Methods: We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Google Scholar for relevant studies and assessed risk of bias using the Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies - of Interventions (ROBINS-I) Cochrane Collaboration tool. Results: Five observational studies with 359 TAVR and 1,872 SAVR patients were included in the analysis. Overall, patients undergoing TAVR had a statistically insignificant lower rate of in-hospital mortality (7.2% vs 18.1%; odds ratio [OR] 0.67; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.25, 1.82; I2=61%) than patients receiving SAVR. In propensity score-matched cohorts, patients undergoing TAVR had lower rates of in-hospital mortality (7.3% vs 13.2%; OR 0.51; 95% CI 0.27, 0.98; I2=13%), blood transfusion (27.4% vs 51.1%; OR 0.36; 95% CI 0.21, 0.60; I2=31%), and hospital length of stay (10.9 vs 15.7 days; mean difference -6.32; 95% CI -10.28, -2.36; I2=83%) than patients having SAVR. No significant differences between the 2 interventions were detected in the proportion of patients discharged home (65.3% vs 53.9%; OR 1.3; 95% CI 0.56, 3.05; I2=67%), acute kidney injury (10.4% vs 17.1%; OR 0.55; 95% CI 0.29, 1.07; I2= 0%), or mean cost of hospitalization ($250,386 vs $257,464; standardized mean difference -0.07; 95% CI -0.29, 0.14; I2=0%). Conclusion: In patients with chronic liver disease, TAVR may be associated with lower rates of in-hospital mortality, blood transfusion, and hospital length of stay compared with SAVR.

Trans-Catheter Aortic Valve Replacement and Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement Outcomes in Patients with Dialysis: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Dialysis is associated with higher rate of aortic valve calcification and higher cardiovascular mortality. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is an established alternative for surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients with higher and intermediate co-morbidities including dialysis. METHODS: Two independent investigators systematically searched Medline, Cochrane, and Web of Science. The ROBINS-I tool was used to analyze and assess the bias from the selected studies. RESULTS: The search resulted in 4 observational studies with a total of 966 patients. TAVR in dialysis patients was associated with no significant difference in in-hospital mortality [8.1% vs 10.3%; OR (95% CI) 0.74 (0.35, 1.60), I2 = 50%, P = 0.45], risk-of-strokes at 30 days [2% vs 4.4%; OR (95% CI) 0.49 (0.22, 1.09), I2 = 0%, P = 0.08], vascular complications [12.7% vs 13.2%; OR (95% CI) 0.96 (0.55, 1.67), I2 = 0%, P = 0.89], need of blood transfusion [43.1% vs 66.4%; OR (95% CI) 0.27 (0.05, 1.39), I2 = 89%, P = 0.12], or bleeding risk [5.6% vs 6.8%; OR (95% CI) 0.91 (0.18, 4.64), I2 = 5%, P = 0.91] when compared to SAVR. TAVR was associated with significantly shorter length of stay [8.5 days vs 14.2 days; mean difference (95% CI) -5.89 (-9.13, -2.64), I2 = 76%, P < 0.0001] and higher pacemaker implantation [11.4% vs 6.8%; OR (95% CI) 1.74 (1.07, 2.81), I2 = 5%, P = 0.02]. CONCLUSION: TAVR outcomes were comparable to SAVR but had a significantly shorter length of stay and a higher pacemaker implantation rate in dialysis patients.

Inadequacy of Pulse Oximetry in the Catheterization Laboratory. An Exploratory Study Monitoring Respiratory Status Using Arterial Blood Gases during Cardiac Catheterization with Conscious Sedation.

BACKGROUND: Benzodiazepines and opioids are commonly used for conscious sedation (CS) in cardiac catheterization laboratory (CCL) patients. Both drugs are known to predispose to hypoxemia, apnea and decreased responsiveness to PCO2, resulting in decreased arterial pH and PO2, as well as increased PCO2. We want to determine the effects of CS on arterial blood gas (ABG) in CCL patient, and identify if pulse oximetry monitoring is adequate. METHODS: We enrolled 18 subjects undergoing elective catheterization. Measurement of ABGs at one-minute intervals was done from the moment of arterial access until case end. The results of ABGs were not available to the clinician who administered sedation. Relationships of pH, PCO2, PaO2 and SaO2 were studied by plotting time series graphs. Significant changes were defined as pH <7.30, SaO2 < 90, and PCO2 > 50 mmHg. RESULTS: No significant change in pH, PCO2, PaO2 and SaO2 was noted in 4/18 (22%) subjects. A significant drop in SaO2 was noted in 4/18 (22%). A significant change in PCO2 and/or pH was noted in 10/18 (55%) cases. Among the 16 (16/18) subjects receiving supplemental oxygen, 7 (7/18, 39%) had no drop in SaO2, but developed respiratory acidosis. At the end of the case, 5/18 (28%) subjects had respiratory acidosis with normal PaO2. CONCLUSION: Significant hypercarbia and acidosis occurred frequently in this small study during CS in patients undergoing cardiac catheterization. Relying on pulse oximetry alone especially with patients on supplemental oxygen may lead to failure in detecting respiratory acidosis in a significant number of patients.

Trauma-Induced Conduction Disturbances.

BACKGROUND: Electrical disturbances following blunt cardiac injuries are rare but can be caused by electrical or structural damage to the heart. We present the case of a patient who had conduction abnormalities following blunt traumatic injury that were incidentally detected on telemetry. CASE REPORT: A 64-year-old female with no history of cardiac disease was brought to the emergency department after a motor vehicle collision that resulted in chest wall bruising. The patient was found to have L-spine fractures and was admitted for observation. During her hospitalization, the patient had multiple episodes of heart block. A temporary pacemaker was inserted because of the recurrent episodes, and a dual-chamber permanent pacemaker was placed on day 4 of her hospitalization. CONCLUSION: Heart block as a consequence of blunt cardiac injury is rare; however, it needs to be recognized as early as possible. Permanent pacemaker placement is usually indicated for patients with prolonged or recurrent episodes.

The impact of mitral stenosis on outcomes of aortic valve stenosis patient undergoing surgical aortic valve replacement or transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

BACKGROUND: The concomitant presence of mitral stenosis (MS) in the setting of symptomatic aortic stenosis represent a clinical challenge. Little is known regarding the outcome of mitral stenosis (MS) patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). Therefore, we sought to study the outcome of MS patients undergoing aortic valve replacement (AVR). METHOD: Using weighted data from the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database between 2011 and 2014, we identified patients who were diagnosed with MS. Patients who had undergone TAVR as a primary procedure were identified and compared to patients who had SAVR. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis were performed for the outcomes of in-hospital mortality, length of stay (LOS), blood transfusion, postprocedural hemorrhage, vascular, cardiac and respiratory complications, permanent pacemaker placement (PPM), postprocedural stroke, acute kidney injury (AKI), and discharge to an outside facility. RESULTS: A total of 4524 patients were diagnosed with MS, of which 552 (12.2%) had TAVR and 3972 (87.8%) had SAVR. TAVR patients were older (79.9 vs 70.0) with more females (67.4% vs 60.0%) and African American patients (7.7% vs 7.1%) (P < 0.001). In addition, the TAVR group had more comorbidities compared to SAVR in term of coronary artery disease (CAD), congestive heart failure (CHF), chronic lung disease, hypertension (HTN), chronic kidney disease (CKD), and peripheral vascular disease (PVD) (P < 0.001 for all). Using Multivariate logistic regression, and after adjusting for potential risk factors, TAVR patients had lower in-hospital mortality (7.9% vs 8.1% adjusted Odds Ratio [aOR], 0.615; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.392-0.964, P = 0.034), shorter LOS. Also, TAVR patients had lower rates of cardiac and respiratory complications, PPM, AKI, and discharge to an outside facility compared with the SAVR group. CONCLUSION: In patients with severe aortic stenosis and concomitant mitral stenosis, TAVR is a safe and attractive option for patients undergoing AVR with less complications compared with SAVR.