Valve-in-Surgical-Valve With SAPIEN 3 for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Based on Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality
- PMID: 34003666
- DOI: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.120.010288
Valve-in-Surgical-Valve With SAPIEN 3 for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Based on Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality
Erratum in
-
Correction to: Valve-in-Surgical-Valve With SAPIEN 3 for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Based on Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality.Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2021 Jul;14(7):e000083. doi: 10.1161/HCV.0000000000000083. Epub 2021 Jul 20. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2021. PMID: 34283630 No abstract available.
Abstract
Background: The use of valve-in-valve–transcatheter aortic valve replacement (VIV-TAVR) in degenerated aortic bioprosthesis has been increasing, but the Food and Drug Administration approval is limited to high-risk patients. We analyzed the real-world experience of SAPIEN 3 VIV-TAVR, especially in lower-risk patients, based on the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score.
Methods: All transfemoral VIV-TAVR with the SAPIEN 3 and Ultra valves between June 2015 and January 2020 were identified using the STS/American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Valve Therapies Registry. Patients were grouped based on STS score (low score: <4%, intermediate score: 4%≤ and≤8%, high score: >8%). Propensity-matched (1:3) analysis was conducted to compare to patients undergoing native TAVR.
Results: Of 145 917 SAPIEN 3 TAVR patients, 4460 (3%) underwent transfemoral VIV-TAVR with available baseline STS data in 4276 patients. Average age was 73.9±11.2, 66.4% were male, and the mean STS score was 6.9±6.0%. Overall 30-day mortality was 2.4% (observed to expected ratio, 0.33), and 1-year mortality was 10.8%. 30-day mortality and observed to expected ratio were 0.9% and 0.32 in low-score, 2.2% and 0.38 in the intermediate-score, and 4.3% and 0.31 in the high-score group. Based on propensity-matched analysis, 30-day mortality was similar and 1-year mortality was lower in VIV compared to native TAVR among all risk groups. When the groups were analyzed based on the Heart Team risk stratification using high-risk and non–high risk, the findings remained consistent.
Conclusions: In this real-world study, VIV-TAVR had excellent 30-day and 1-year outcomes, especially in lower-risk patients. These findings may suggest the feasibility and expansion of VIV-TAVR in lower-risk patients. However, long-term follow-up continues to be crucial.
Keywords: bioprosthetic; mortality; registry; risk; transcatheter aortic valve replacement.
Comment in
-
Should Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Become the Standard of Care for the Treatment of Failed Surgical Bioprosthetic Valves?Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2021 May;14(5):e010883. doi: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.121.010883. Epub 2021 May 18. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2021. PMID: 34003668 No abstract available.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical