Sutureless aortic valve replacement as an alternative treatment for patients belonging to the "gray zone" between transcatheter aortic valve implantation and conventional surgery: a propensity-matched, multicenter analysis
- PMID: 22974713
- DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2012.07.040
Sutureless aortic valve replacement as an alternative treatment for patients belonging to the "gray zone" between transcatheter aortic valve implantation and conventional surgery: a propensity-matched, multicenter analysis
Abstract
Objective: The aim of this propensity-matched, multicenter study was to compare early clinical and echocardiographic outcomes of patients undergoing transapical aortic valve implantation (TA-TAVI) versus patients undergoing sutureless aortic valve replacement (SU-AVR) for severe symptomatic aortic valve stenosis.
Methods: We reviewed 468 TA-TAVIs performed in 20 centers from April 2008 to May 2011, and 51 SU-AVRs performed in 3 centers from March to September 2011. Based on a propensity score analysis, 2 groups with 38 matched pairs were created. Variables used in the propensity analysis were age, sex, body surface area, New York Heart Association class, logistic EuroSCORE, peripheral vascular disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, aortic valve area, mitral regurgitation, and left ventricular ejection fraction.
Results: Preoperative characteristics of the 2 groups were comparable. Hospital mortality was 5.3% and 0% in the TA-TAVI and SU-AVR groups, respectively (P = .49). We did not observe stroke or acute myocardial infarction in the 2 groups. Permanent pacemaker implantation was needed in 2 patients of each group (5.3%, P = 1.0). Dialysis was required in 2 patients (5.3%) in the SU-AVR group and in 1 patient (2.7%) in the TA-TAVI group (P = 1.0). Predischarge echocardiographic data showed that the incidence of paravalvular leak (at least mild) was greater in the TA-TAVI group (44.7% vs 15.8%, P = .001), but there were no differences in terms of mean transprosthetic gradient (10.3 ± 5 mm Hg vs 11 ± 3.7 mm Hg, P = .59).
Conclusions: This preliminary experience showed that, in patients at high risk for conventional surgery, SU-AVR is as safe and effective as TA-TAVI and that it is associated with a lower rate of postprocedural paravalvular leak.
Copyright © 2012 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.
Comment in
-
Discussion.J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2012 Nov;144(5):1016-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2012.07.044. Epub 2012 Sep 10. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2012. PMID: 22974714 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Conventional surgery, sutureless valves, and transapical aortic valve replacement: what is the best option for patients with aortic valve stenosis? A multicenter, propensity-matched analysis.J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2013 Nov;146(5):1065-70; discussion 1070-1. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2013.06.047. Epub 2013 Sep 8. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2013. PMID: 24021955
-
Effect of severe left ventricular systolic dysfunction on hospital outcome after transcatheter aortic valve implantation or surgical aortic valve replacement: results from a propensity-matched population of the Italian OBSERVANT multicenter study.J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2014 Feb;147(2):568-75. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2013.10.006. Epub 2013 Nov 19. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2014. PMID: 24263007
-
Sutureless replacement versus transcatheter valve implantation in aortic valve stenosis: a propensity-matched analysis of 2 strategies in high-risk patients.J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2014 Feb;147(2):561-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2013.10.025. Epub 2013 Nov 23. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2014. PMID: 24280712
-
A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis of Sutureless Aortic Valve Replacement Versus Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation.Ann Thorac Surg. 2018 Sep;106(3):924-929. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2018.03.059. Epub 2018 Apr 27. Ann Thorac Surg. 2018. PMID: 29709503
-
Transfemoral versus Transapical Aortic Implantation for Aortic Stenosis Based on No Significant Difference in Logistic EuroSCORE: A Meta-Analysis.Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2016 Aug;64(5):374-81. doi: 10.1055/s-0035-1555606. Epub 2015 Jun 29. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2016. PMID: 26121378 Review.
Cited by
-
Non-Inferiority of Sutureless Aortic Valve Replacement in the TAVR Era: David versus Goliath.Life (Basel). 2022 Jun 29;12(7):979. doi: 10.3390/life12070979. Life (Basel). 2022. PMID: 35888069 Free PMC article.
-
Early Clinical Results of Perceval Sutureless Aortic Valve in 139 Patients: Freeman Experience.Braz J Cardiovasc Surg. 2018 Jan-Feb;33(1):8-14. doi: 10.21470/1678-9741-2017-0087. Braz J Cardiovasc Surg. 2018. PMID: 29617495 Free PMC article.
-
Advances in the management of severe aortic stenosis.Ir J Med Sci. 2016 May;185(2):309-17. doi: 10.1007/s11845-016-1417-7. Epub 2016 Feb 17. Ir J Med Sci. 2016. PMID: 26886020 Review.
-
Comparison of Sutureless Aortic Valve Replacement and Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Propensity Score Matching.Rev Cardiovasc Med. 2024 Nov 4;25(11):391. doi: 10.31083/j.rcm2511391. eCollection 2024 Nov. Rev Cardiovasc Med. 2024. PMID: 39618858 Free PMC article.
-
Minimally invasive surgical versus transcatheter aortic valve replacement: A multicenter study.Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc. 2019 Apr 28;23:100362. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcha.2019.100362. eCollection 2019 Jun. Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc. 2019. PMID: 31061875 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Miscellaneous