Do outcomes from transcatheter aortic valve implantation vary according to access route and valve type? The UK TAVI Registry.

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether outcomes from transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) vary according to access route and valve type in a real-world population. BACKGROUND: Registry and uncontrolled trial data have found that patients undergoing nonfemoral TAVI have higher early and late mortality. It is not clear whether worse outcomes relate directly to access route. There have been no direct comparisons of outcomes according to valve type. METHODS: Data were collected prospectively on 1,620 patients undergoing TAVI in the UK and compared in 4 groups SAPIEN transfemoral (TF); SAPIEN transapical (TA); CoreValve TF, CoreValve subclavian. Univariable and multivariable regression analysis was performed to identify independent predictors of mortality. RESULTS: Mortality in patients undergoing SAPIEN TAVI via a TA approach was higher than with TF at 30 days (11.2% vs. 4.4%, P < 0.01), 1 year (28.7% vs. 18.1%, P = 0.01), and 2 years (56.0% vs. 43.5%, P = 0.01). Logistic EuroSCORE was higher in TA patients (22.5 ± 12.9% vs. 17.7 ± 11.1%, P < 0.0001). After multivariable analysis TA access was associated with increased mortality at 30 days (OR 2.56, 95% CI 1.46-4.48, P < 0.01) and 2 years (OR 1.75, 1.08-2.74, P = 0.02). There was no significant difference in mortality at any time-point between patients treated with SAPIEN (n = 812) and CoreValve (n = 808) prostheses. CoreValve-treated patients had a higher rate of permanent pacemaker implantation (23.1% vs. 7.2%, P < 0.0001), and grade ≥2 aortic regurgitation on postprocedure echocardiography (13.0% vs. 7.3%, P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing TA TAVI experienced increased early and late mortality compared to a TF approach. Survival was not influenced by valve type.