RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a well-established treatment for symptomatic patients with aortic stenosis. Yet, the impact of sex differences and public vs. private procedural setting on TAVI outcomes remain uncertain. METHODS: The RIBAC-NT (Brazilian Registry for Evaluation of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Outcomes) dataset included 3194 TAVI patients from 2009 to 2021. This retrospective analysis explored disparities in baseline characteristics, procedural and in-hospital outcomes stratifying patients by sex and procedural setting. Temporal trends were also investigated. RESULTS: We included 1551 (49 %) female and 1643 (51 %) male patients. Women were older (83 [78-87] vs. 81 [75-85] years; p < 0.01) but had a lower prevalence of diabetes mellitus (30.2 % vs. 36.3 %, p < 0.01) and coronary artery disease (39.0 % vs. 52.2 %, p < 0.01). However, women had a 3-fold higher higher risk of life-threatening bleeding (6.1 % vs. 2.4 %, p < 0.01). Women presented higher procedural and in-hospital mortality rates (4.4 % vs. 2.5 % and 7.7 % vs. 4.5 %, all p < 0.01, respectively). Although public hospitals presented ~2-fold higher procedural mortality rate compared with private settings (5.0 % vs. 2.7 %, p < 0.01), after multivariable analysis procedural setting was not independently associated with in-hospital mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Women had higher procedural and in-hospital mortality rates after TAVI as compared with men, while facing higher life-threatening bleeding and adverse events rates. Although public hospitals exhibited higher mortality rates than private centers, procedural setting was not independently associated with in-hospital mortality.
RESUMO
Background No study has evaluated the impact of the additional manipulation demanded by multiple resheathing (MR) in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement with repositionable self-expanding valves. Methods and Results This study included a real-world, multicenter registry involving 16 centers from Canada, Germany, Latin America, and Spain. All consecutive patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement with the Evolut R, Evolut PRO, and Portico valves were included. Patients were divided according to the number of resheathing: no resheathing, single resheathing (SR), and MR. The primary end point was device success. Secondary outcomes included procedural complications, early safety events, and 1-year mortality. In 1026 patients, the proportion who required SR and MR was 23.9% and 9.3%, respectively. MR was predicted by the use of Portico and moderate/severe aortic regurgitation at baseline (both with P<0.01). Patients undergoing MR had less device success (no resheathing=89.9%, SR=89.8%, and MR=80%; P=0.01), driven by more need for a second prosthesis and device embolization. At 30 days, there were no differences in safety events. At 1 year, more deaths occurred with MR (no resheathing=10.5%, SR=8.0%, and MR=18.8%; P=0.014). After adjusting for baseline differences and center experience by annual volume, MR associated with less device success (odds ratio, 0.42; P=0.003) and increased 1-year mortality (hazard ratio, 2.06; P=0.01). When including only the Evolut R/PRO cases (N=837), MR continued to have less device success (P<0.001) and a trend toward increased mortality (P=0.05). Conclusions Repositioning a self-expanding valve is used in a third of patients, being multiple in ≈10%. MR, but not SR, was associated with more device failure and higher 1-year mortality, regardless of the type of valve implanted.