Transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with end stage renal disease.

OBJECTIVE: To assess contemporary national trends of comorbidities, outcomes, and health care resource utilization in patients with aortic stenosis (AS) and end-stage renal disease (ESRD) undergoing transcatheter and surgical aortic valve replacement (TAVR and SAVR). METHODS AND RESULTS: The National-Inpatient-Sample was used to study trends in patients with AS and ESRD undergoing TAVR and SAVR between January 2012 and December 2017. Of 12,550 patients, 5,735 underwent TAVR and 6,815 underwent SAVR. Over the years, the utilization of SAVR declined (from 82.0 to 37.7%); and increased for TAVR (from 18.0 to 62.3%; p < .001). Patients receiving TAVR were older (74.6 [9.1] vs. 66.8 years [9.1]), had a higher proportion of females (37.1 vs. 32.5%), Caucasians (68.7 vs. 60.9%) and Asian /Pacific Islanders (3.1 vs. 2.7%; p < .001 for all). The TAVR patients, despite having higher comorbidity burden (anemia, coronary artery disease, chronic pulmonary disease, congestive heart failure, cerebrovascular disease, and peripheral vascular disease) had lower inpatient mortality and complications (ST-elevation myocardial infarction, pneumonia, pneumothorax, pulmonary embolism, cardiogenic shock, cardiac arrest, and need for mechanical ventilators and vasopressors). The median length of stay (13.9-6.5 days; p < .001) and cost of stay ($311,538.16 to $255,693.40; p < .001) reduced with TAVR; but remained unchanged with SAVR. Higher proportion of patients was discharged home after TAVR vs. SAVR. CONCLUSION: Among patients with AS and ESRD, despite providing therapy to subjects with higher comorbidity burden, TAVR was associated with lower inpatient mortality, complications, length of stay, cost of care, and higher home disposition rates when compared with SAVR.

Time course of the survival advantage of transcatheter over surgical aortic valve replacement: Interplay between sex and patient risk profile.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to explore the time course of survival advantage of TAVR over SAVR as function of the patients' risk and sex. BACKGROUND: Women have been reported to have better survival than men undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). However, scant data on the sex-based survival benefit of TAVR over surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) are available. METHODS: A systematic review of studies reporting clinical outcomes of men and women undergoing TAVR or SAVR was performed. Studies were divided into two groups according to average patient's risk score and the interplay of surgical risk and sex on outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: Eight studies involving 6,596 women and 7,204 men patients were extracted. Unlike mens, women patients had survival advantage from TAVR over SAVR that became substantial at 1 year from index procedure and persisted at 2-year of follow-up. Moreover, this sex-based TAVR survival advantage was mainly observed in higher surgical risk patients. Men showed a significantly lower rate of residual paravalvular leak after SAVR. CONCLUSIONS: Women patients had a selective mortality benefit from TAVR compared to SAVR. This sex-based TAVR benefit was mainly observed in high surgical risk patients beyond 1 year from procedure.

Mortality prediction after transcatheter treatment of failed bioprosthetic aortic valves utilizing various international scoring systems: Insights from the Valve-in-Valve International Data (VIVID).

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (TAVI) is commonly used to deploy new bioprosthetic valves inside degenerated surgically implanted aortic valves in high risk patients. The three scoring systems used to assess risk of postprocedural mortality are: Logistic EuroSCORE (LES), EuroSCORE II (ES II), and Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS). OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to analyze the accuracy of LES, ES II, and STS in estimating all-cause mortality after transcatheter aortic valve-in-valve (ViV) implantations, which was not assessed before. METHODS: Using the Valve-in-Valve International Data (VIVID) registry, a total of 1,550 patients from 110 centers were included. The study compared the observed 30-day overall mortality vs. the respective predicted mortalities calculated by risk scores. The accuracy of prediction models was assessed based on calibration and discrimination. RESULTS: Observed mortality at 30 days was 5.3%, while average expected mortalities by LES, ES II and STS were 29.49 (± 17.2), 14.59 (± 8.6), and 9.61 (± 8.51), respectively. All three risk scores overestimated 30-day mortality with ratios of 0.176 (95% CI 0.138-0.214), 0.342 (95% CI 0.264-0.419), and 0.536 (95% CI 0.421-0.651), respectively. 30-day mortality ROC curves demonstrated that ES II had the largest AUC at 0.722, followed by STS at 0.704, and LES at 0.698. CONCLUSIONS: All three scores overestimated mortality at 30 days with ES II showing the highest predictability compared to LES and STS; and therefore, should be recommended for ViV procedures. There is a need for a dedicated scoring system for patients undergoing ViV interventions.

Outcomes of intermediate-risk patients treated with transcatheter and surgical aortic valve replacement in the Veterans Affairs Healthcare System: A single center 20-year experience.

BACKGROUND: Transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) was superior to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in the placement of aortic transcatheter valves (PARTNER) 2A trial (P2). The generalizability of the trial results to the broader population of patients with intermediate surgical risk remains unknown. OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcomes of SAVR and TAVR among patients with intermediate surgical risk treated in the VA Healthcare System. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the clinical characteristics and outcomes on all SAVR (1987-2014) and TAVR procedures (2015-2017) performed at the Minneapolis VA Healthcare System. Patients were divided into three groups based on their estimated 30-day mortality risk. The primary outcome was a composite of death or stroke at 30-days. RESULTS: A total of 1,049 patients underwent SAVR with (n = 468, 45%) or without CABG (n = 581, 55%) and 110 underwent TAVR during the study period. Intermediate-risk patients represented 29.4% and 40% of patients undergoing SAVR and TAVR, respectively. The predicted 30-day mortality risk of intermediate-risk patients was 5.5% for the SAVR group and 5.2% for the TAVR group (P = 0.54). The observed combined rate of stroke or death at 30-days for intermediate-risk patients treated with SAVR and TAVR was 11% and 2.2%, respectively (P = 0.05). The results for SAVR and TAVR at the VA were comparable to the P2 trial and STS database (all P = NS). The results did not change when the analysis was restricted to a more contemporary (2005-2014) surgical cohort or isolated SAVR. The number needed to treat to prevent one death/stroke with TAVR was 10. CONCLUSIONS: Adoption of TAVR as the preferred treatment modality in intermediate-risk patients may result in significant improvements in morbidity and mortality.

The fifth redo operation for mitral paravalvular leakage and free-floating closure device extraction: A case report.

Paravalvular leakage (PVL) is a serious complication of prosthetic valve surgery. Surgical and transcatheter methods can be used for treatment. It is rare for closure devices to detach and free float in cardiac chambers. Transcatheter methods can be reused, but surgical treatment is more appropriate if this reuse is due to an increase in PVL. Here, we present a successfully operated case with a closure device freely passing through the PVL from the ventricle to the atrium, after four surgical valve replacements and two transcatheter device closures, owing to infective endocarditis.