» Articles » PMID: 35919341

Comorbidities May Offset Expected Improved Survival After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Abstract

Aims: After transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular comorbidities may offset the survival benefit from the procedure. We aimed to describe the relationships between that benefit and patient comorbidities.

Methods And Results: The study pooled two European cohorts of patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS-pooled): one with patients who underwent (cohort of AS patients treated by TAVR,  = 233) and another with patients who did not undergo TAVR (cohort of AS patients treated medically;  = 291). The investigators collected the following: calcification prognostic impact (CAPRI) and Charlson scores for cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular comorbidities, activities of daily living (ADL)/instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) scores for frailty as well as routine Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score and Logistic Euroscore. Unlike ADL/IADL scores, CAPRI and Charlson scores were found to be independent predictors of 1-year all-cause death in the AS-pooled cohort, with and without adjustment for STS score or Logistic Euroscore; they were thus retained to define a three-level prognostic scale (good, intermediate, and poor). The survival benefit from TAVR-vs. no TAVR-was stratified according to these three prognosis categories. The beneficial effect of TAVR on 1-year all-cause death was significant in patients with good and intermediate prognosis, hazard ratio (95% confidence interval): 0.36 (0.18; 0.72) and 0.32 (0.15; 0.67). That effect was reduced and not statistically significant in patient with poor prognosis [0.65 (0.22; 1.88)].

Conclusion: The study showed that, beyond a given comorbidity burden (as assessed by CAPRI and Charlson scores), the probability of death within a year was high and poorly reduced by TAVR. This indicates the futility of TAVR in patients in the poor prognosis category.

Citing Articles

Futility in TAVI: A scoping review of definitions, predictive criteria, and medical predictive models.

Ferry C, Fiery-Fraillon J, Togni M, Cook S PLoS One. 2025; 20(1):e0313399.

PMID: 39787130 PMC: 11717200. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0313399.


Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (from inception to standard treatment): a single-center observational study.

Hoydahl M, Busund R, Rosner A, Kjonas D Front Cardiovasc Med. 2024; 11:1298346.

PMID: 38287983 PMC: 10822919. DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2024.1298346.


Unsupervised cluster analysis reveals different phenotypes in patients after transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

Kusunose K, Tsuji T, Hirata Y, Takahashi T, Sata M, Sato K Eur Heart J Open. 2024; 4(1):oead136.

PMID: 38188937 PMC: 10766904. DOI: 10.1093/ehjopen/oead136.

References
1.
Ogden L, He J, Lydick E, Whelton P . Long-term absolute benefit of lowering blood pressure in hypertensive patients according to the JNC VI risk stratification. Hypertension. 2000; 35(2):539-43. DOI: 10.1161/01.hyp.35.2.539. View

2.
Leon M, Smith C, Mack M, Miller D, Moses J, Svensson L . Transcatheter aortic-valve implantation for aortic stenosis in patients who cannot undergo surgery. N Engl J Med. 2010; 363(17):1597-607. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1008232. View

3.
Baumgartner H, Falk V, Bax J, De Bonis M, Hamm C, Holm P . 2017 ESC/EACTS Guidelines for the management of valvular heart disease. Eur Heart J. 2017; 38(36):2739-2791. DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehx391. View

4.
Puri R, Iung B, Cohen D, Rodes-Cabau J . TAVI or No TAVI: identifying patients unlikely to benefit from transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Eur Heart J. 2016; 37(28):2217-25. DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehv756. View

5.
Gilard M, Eltchaninoff H, Iung B, Donzeau-Gouge P, Chevreul K, Fajadet J . Registry of transcatheter aortic-valve implantation in high-risk patients. N Engl J Med. 2012; 366(18):1705-15. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1114705. View