Futility in TAVI: A scoping review of definitions, predictive criteria, and medical predictive models
- PMID: 39787130
- PMCID: PMC11717200
- DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0313399
Futility in TAVI: A scoping review of definitions, predictive criteria, and medical predictive models
Abstract
Background: Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (TAVI) procedures are rapidly expanding, necessitating a more extensive stratification of patients with aortic stenosis. Especially in the high-risk group, some patients fail to derive optimal or any benefits from TAVI, leading to the risk of futile interventions. Despite consensus among several experts regarding the importance of recognizing and anticipating such interventions, the definition, and predictive criteria for futility in TAVI remain ambiguous.
Aim: The purpose of this study is to explore the literature addressing the definition, predictive criteria, and medical predictive models for futility in cases of TAVI.
Design: A scoping review was conducted by two researchers and reported in accordance with the PRISMA-ScR guidelines.
Eligibility criteria: Studies addressing futility in TAVI, including definitions, predictive variables, and models, were included without restrictions on study design but were excluded study only on surgical valve replacement, valve in valve or aortic stenosis causes by other pathology than calcification.
Information sources: We identified 129 studies from five key sources: CINAHL, PUBMED, the Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, and EMBASE. The literature search was conducted in two rounds-first in February 2024 and again in October 2024-using no restrictions on the year of publication or the language of the studies. Additional references were included through cross-referencing.
Results: The definition of futility is not unanimous, although most researchers agreed on 1-year survival as a cutoff. The majority of studies focused on single variables that can predict 1-year survival, employing either prospective or retrospective designs. Frailty was the major concept studied. Numerous predictive models have been identified, but no consensus was found.
Conclusion: Futility concepts generate interest in the TAVI procedure. In this review, numerous articles state that 1-year mortality serves as a cutoff to define futile procedures. Some variables, cardiac or otherwise, are independent predictors of 1-year mortality. Medical predictive models showed moderate sensitivity and specificity, except for machine learning, which shows promise for the future. However, few articles delve deeply into non-quantifiable parameters such as patient goals and objectives or ethical questions. More studies should focus on these parameters.
Copyright: © 2025 Ferry et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Similar articles
-
Transcatheter aortic valve implantation-related futility: prevalence, predictors, and clinical risk model.Heart Vessels. 2020 Sep;35(9):1281-1289. doi: 10.1007/s00380-020-01599-9. Epub 2020 Apr 6. Heart Vessels. 2020. PMID: 32253528
-
Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Patients With Severe Aortic Valve Stenosis at Low Surgical Risk: A Health Technology Assessment.Ont Health Technol Assess Ser. 2020 Nov 2;20(14):1-148. eCollection 2020. Ont Health Technol Assess Ser. 2020. PMID: 33240455 Free PMC article.
-
The impact of the development of transcatheter aortic valve implantation on the management of severe aortic stenosis in high-risk patients: treatment strategies and outcome.Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2017 Jan;51(1):80-88. doi: 10.1093/ejcts/ezw211. Epub 2016 Aug 30. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2017. PMID: 27582074
-
TAVI or No TAVI: identifying patients unlikely to benefit from transcatheter aortic valve implantation.Eur Heart J. 2016 Jul 21;37(28):2217-25. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehv756. Epub 2016 Jan 26. Eur Heart J. 2016. PMID: 26819226 Review.
-
Transcatheter aortic valve implantation versus surgical aortic valve replacement for severe aortic stenosis in people with low surgical risk.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Dec 20;12(12):CD013319. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013319.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019. PMID: 31860123 Free PMC article.
Cited by
-
Surgical and transcatheter aortic valve replacement align survival with general population expectations: insights from standardized mortality ratios.Front Cardiovasc Med. 2025 Apr 11;12:1547456. doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2025.1547456. eCollection 2025. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2025. PMID: 40290187 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Fournier S, Roguelov C, Monney P, Kirsch M, Eeckhout E, Antiochos P, et al.. TAVI en 2018: nouvelles indications et questions ouvertes. Rev Med Suisse. 23 mai 2018;608:1097–100. - PubMed
-
- Vahanian A, Beyersdorf F, Praz F, Milojevic M, Baldus S, Bauersachs J, et al.. 2021 ESC/EACTS Guidelines for the management of valvular heart disease: Developed by the Task Force for the management of valvular heart disease of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS). Revista Española de Cardiología (English Edition). juin 2022;75(6):524. - PubMed
-
- Lauck SB, Yu M, Ding L, Hardiman S, Wong D, Sathananthan J, et al.. Quality-of-Life Outcomes After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in a “Real World” Population: Insights From a Prospective Canadian Database. CJC Open. 1 août 2021;3(8):1033–42. doi: 10.1016/j.cjco.2021.04.006 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
-
- Lowenstern A, Vora AN, Dunning A, Schulte PJ, Vemulapalli S, Hughes GC, et al.. Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement versus Medical Management among Patients with Aortic Stenosis and Left Ventricular Systolic Dysfunction. Structural Heart. 1 sept 2018;2(5):388–95.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources