Midterm Outcomes Following Sutureless and Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Low-Risk Patients With Aortic Stenosis.
Circ Cardiovasc Interv
; 14(11): e011120, 2021 11.
Article
in En
| MEDLINE
| ID: mdl-34607449
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND:
Sutureless-surgical aortic valve replacement (SU-SAVR) has been proposed as a surgical alternative for treating aortic stenosis, which facilitates a minimally invasive approach. While some studies have compared the early outcomes of SU-SAVR versus transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), most data were obtained in high-risk patients and/or limited to in-hospital outcomes. This study aimed to compare in-hospital and midterm clinical outcomes following SU-SAVR and TAVR in low-risk patients with aortic stenosis.METHODS:
A total of 806 consecutive low-risk (EuroSCORE II <4%) patients underwent TAVR or SU-SAVR between 2011 and 2020 in 2 centers. A 11 propensity score matching was performed and identified 171 pairs with similar characteristics that were included in the analysis. Baseline characteristics, in-hospital and follow-up events (defined according to Valve Academic Research Consortium-2) were collected.RESULTS:
Baseline characteristics were well balanced between groups, with a median EuroSCORE II of 1.9% (1.3%-2.5%) in both SU-SAVR and TAVR groups (P=0.85). There were no statistically significant differences regarding in-hospital mortality (SU-SAVR 4.1%, TAVR 1.8%, P=0.199) and stroke (SU-SAVR 2.3%, TAVR 2.9%, P=0.736), but SU-SAVR recipients exhibited higher rates of bleeding and new-onset atrial fibrillation, higher residual transvalvular gradients (P<0.001), and a lower rate of pacemaker implantation (P=0.011). After a median follow-up of 2 (1-3) years, there were no differences between groups in all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.52-1.82], P=0.936) and stroke (hazard ratio, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.32-2.15], P=0.708), but SU-SAVR was associated with a higher risk of heart failure hospitalization (hazard ratio, 5.38 [95% CI, 1.88-15.38], P=0.002).CONCLUSIONS:
In low-risk patients with aortic stenosis, TAVR was associated with improved in-hospital outcomes (except for conduction disturbances) and valve hemodynamics, compared with SU-SAVR. Although similar mortality and stroke rates were observed at 2-year follow-up, the risk of heart failure hospitalization was higher among SU-SAVR patients. These results may contribute to reinforce TAVR over SU-SAVR for the majority of such patients. Graphic Abstract A graphic abstract is available for this article.Key words
Full text:
1
Collection:
01-internacional
Database:
MEDLINE
Main subject:
Aortic Valve Stenosis
/
Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation
/
Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement
Type of study:
Etiology_studies
/
Prognostic_studies
/
Risk_factors_studies
Limits:
Humans
Language:
En
Journal:
Circ Cardiovasc Interv
Journal subject:
ANGIOLOGIA
/
CARDIOLOGIA
Year:
2021
Document type:
Article