Outcomes of patients with chronic lung disease and severe aortic stenosis treated with transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement or standard therapy: insights from the PARTNER trial (placement of AoRTic TraNscathetER Valve)
- PMID: 24140659
- DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2013.09.024
Outcomes of patients with chronic lung disease and severe aortic stenosis treated with transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement or standard therapy: insights from the PARTNER trial (placement of AoRTic TraNscathetER Valve)
Abstract
Objectives: The study aimed to evaluate the impact of chronic lung disease (CLD) on outcomes of severe aortic stenosis patients across all treatment modalities.
Background: Outcomes of patients with CLD undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) have not been systematically examined.
Methods: All patients who underwent TAVR in the PARTNER (Placement of AoRTic TraNscathetER Valve) trial, including the continued access registry (n = 2,553; 1,108 with CLD), were evaluated according to CLD clinical severity. Additionally, outcomes of CLD patients included in the randomization arms of the PARTNER trial were compared: Cohort A patients (high-risk operable) treated by either TAVR (n = 149) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR); (n = 138); and Cohort B patients (inoperable) treated by either TAVR (n = 72) or standard therapy only (n = 95).
Results: Among all TAVR-treated patients, at 1-year follow-up, patients with CLD had higher mortality than those without it (23.4% vs. 19.6%, p = 0.02). Baseline characteristics of CLD patients who underwent TAVR were similar to respective controls. In Cohort A, 2-year all-cause death rates were similar (TAVR 35.2% and SAVR 33.6%, p = 0.92), whereas in Cohort B, the death rate was lower after TAVR (52.0% vs. 69.6% after standard therapy only, p = 0.04). Independent predictors for mortality in CLD patients undergoing TAVR included poor mobility (6-min walk test <50 m; hazard ratio: 1.67, p = 0.0009) and oxygen-dependency (hazard ratio: 1.44, p = 0.02). Although CLD patients undergoing TAVR have worse outcomes than patients without CLD, TAVR is better in these patients than standard therapy and is similar to SAVR.
Conclusions: Although patients with CLD undergoing TAVR had worse outcomes than patients without CLD, TAVR performed better in these patients than standard therapy and was similar to SAVR. However, CLD patients who were either poorly mobile or oxygen-dependent had poor outcomes. (THE PARTNER TRIAL: Placement of AoRTic TraNscathetER Valve Trial; NCT00530894).
Keywords: 1-s forced expiratory volume; 6-min walk test; 6MWT; AS; BMI; CLD; FEV1; NRCA; NYHA; New York Heart Association; RCT; SAVR; STS; Society of Thoracic Surgeons; TAVR; aortic stenosis; body mass index; chronic lung disease; nonrandomized continued access; pulmonary disease; randomized controlled trial; surgical aortic valve replacement; transcatheter aortic valve replacement.
Copyright © 2014 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Similar articles
-
Sex-related differences in outcomes after transcatheter or surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with severe aortic stenosis: Insights from the PARTNER Trial (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valve).J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014 Apr 22;63(15):1522-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2014.01.036. Epub 2014 Feb 19. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014. PMID: 24561149 Clinical Trial.
-
Transapical aortic valve replacement for severe aortic stenosis: results from the nonrandomized continued access cohort of the PARTNER trial.Ann Thorac Surg. 2013 Dec;96(6):2083-9. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2013.05.093. Epub 2013 Aug 20. Ann Thorac Surg. 2013. PMID: 23968764 Clinical Trial.
-
Outcomes after transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a comparison of the randomized PARTNER (Placement of AoRTic TraNscathetER Valves) trial with the NRCA (Nonrandomized Continued Access) registry.JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2014 Nov;7(11):1245-51. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2014.05.033. Epub 2014 Nov 17. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2014. PMID: 25459036 Clinical Trial.
-
A comprehensive review of the PARTNER trial.J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2013 Mar;145(3 Suppl):S11-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2012.11.051. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2013. PMID: 23410766 Review.
-
Meta-analysis of complications in aortic valve replacement: comparison of Medtronic-Corevalve, Edwards-Sapien and surgical aortic valve replacement in 8,536 patients.Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2012 Jul 1;80(1):128-38. doi: 10.1002/ccd.23368. Epub 2012 Mar 13. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2012. PMID: 22415849 Review.
Cited by
-
Effect of Pulmonary Hypertension on Survival Outcomes in Patients With Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Cureus. 2024 Apr 18;16(4):e58540. doi: 10.7759/cureus.58540. eCollection 2024 Apr. Cureus. 2024. PMID: 38957831 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Implication of Different ECG Left Ventricular Hypertrophy in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.J Am Heart Assoc. 2022 Feb 15;11(4):e023647. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.121.023647. Epub 2022 Feb 3. J Am Heart Assoc. 2022. PMID: 35112886 Free PMC article.
-
Short- and Long-Term Outcomes After Transcatheter or Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Chronic Lung Disease: An Analysis From the German Aortic Valve Registry.Interdiscip Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2025 Aug 5;40(8):ivaf189. doi: 10.1093/icvts/ivaf189. Interdiscip Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2025. PMID: 40824048 Free PMC article.
-
Midterm Durability and Structural Valve Degeneration of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in a Federal Facility.Innovations (Phila). 2022 Sep;17(5):382-391. doi: 10.1177/15569845221123259. Epub 2022 Oct 11. Innovations (Phila). 2022. PMID: 36217736 Free PMC article.
-
Can Clinical Predictive Models Identify Patients Who Should Not Receive TAVR? A Systematic Review.Struct Heart. 2020;4(4):295-299. doi: 10.1080/24748706.2020.1782549. Epub 2020 Jul 9. Struct Heart. 2020. PMID: 32905421 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Associated data
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
Research Materials