Changes in Risk Profile and Outcomes of Patients Undergoing Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement From the Pre- to Post-Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Eras

Abstract

Background: With initiation of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) programs, centers may see changes in surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) populations and related outcomes because of more high-risk patients undergoing TAVR rather than SAVR. Little data exist on the potential changes in the risk profiles and outcomes of SAVR patients from the pre- to post-TAVR eras. As such, this study sought to evaluate changes in the SAVR population at a tertiary referral center after TAVR program initiation.

Methods: Using a single-center valve surgical database, annual volume, patient characteristics, operative details, and predicted and observed mortality for patients undergoing isolated SAVR or SAVR + coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) from 2006 to 2013 were evaluated. Patients were divided into 3 eras: (1) pre-TAVR (January 2006-June 2009), (2) transition (July 2009-March 2011), and (3) TAVR (April 2011-June 2013). The primary analysis compared predicted and observed mortality in pre-TAVR and TAVR eras.

Results: From 2006 to 2013, 1,380 SAVR patients were identified, with 505 (36.6%), 330 (23.9%), and 545 (39.5%) patients from the pre-TAVR, transition, and TAVR eras, respectively. SAVR case volume increased from 131 to 256 cases per year (95.4% increase) from the pre-TAVR to the post-TAVR eras. Predicted risk of mortality (PROM) for SAVR patients from the pre-TAVR to TAVR eras by The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS)-PROM was stable near 3.8% (p = 0.82). Crude 30-day SAVR mortality trended down from 2.8% in the pre-TAVR era to 1.5% in the post-TAVR era (p = 0.23).

Conclusions: Consistent with previous studies, initiation of a TAVR program was associated with increased SAVR volume. Risk profiles for SAVR patients in the TAVR era remained similar by the STS-PROM, indicating generally stable risk among surgical patients after launching a TAVR program. These data suggest that significant changes in the risk profiles of SAVR patients should not be expected with the initiation of a TAVR program. Further research will need to reevaluate these changes once TAVR becomes more widely available.

Figure 1

Temporal trends in SAVR and TAVR predicted and observed mortality and institutional SAVR case volume over the study period. Annual case volume is displayed on the right axis, while annual mean predicted and observed mortality rates are on the left axis.

Figure 2

Overall survival after SAVR stratified by study era. Patients in TAVR and Transition eras were censored at 1 and 3 years due to low numbers. P-value by log-rank test represents comparison of Pre-TAVR and TAVR populations.