Temporal Changes of Patient Characteristics over 12 years in a Single-center Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Cohort

Overview

Journal Clin Res Cardiol

Specialty Cardiology & Vascular Diseases

Date 2023 Feb 15

PMID 36792752

Authors

Till Joscha Demal

Jessica Weimann

Francisco Miguel Ojeda

Oliver D Bhadra

Matthias Linder

Sebastian Ludwig

David Grundmann

Lisa Voigtlander

Lara Waldschmidt

Johannes Schirmer

Niklas Schofer

Stefan Blankenberg

Hermann Reichenspurner

Lenard Conradi

Moritz Seiffert

Andreas Schaefer

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Beneficial results of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) compared to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients at all risk strata have led to substantial changes in guideline recommendations for valvular heart disease.

Aim: To examine influence of these guideline changes on a real-world TAVI cohort, we evaluated how risk profiles and outcomes of TAVI patients developed in our single-center patient cohort over a period of 12 years.

Methods: Baseline, procedural and 30-day outcome parameters of TAVI patients were retrospectively compared between three time periods (period 1: 2008-2012, period 2: 2013-2017, period 3: 2018-2020).

Results: Between 03/2008 and 12/2020, a total of 3678 patients underwent TAVI at our center. The median age was 81.1 years (25th, 75th percentile: 76.7, 84.9) with no significant change over time. The EuroSCORE II showed a continuous and significant decline from 5.3% (3.3, 8.6) in period 1 to 2.8% (1.7, 5.0) in period 3 (p < 0.001). Furthermore, rates of permanent pacemaker implantation, acute kidney injury, and paravalvular leakage ≥ moderate continuously declined over time. Accordingly, the 30-day mortality fell from 9.3% in period 1 to 4.3% in period 3 (p < 0.001).

Conclusion: Despite substantial guideline alterations, median patient age remained largely unchanged in our TAVI cohort over the past 12 years. Therefore, increased age still appears to be the main reason to choose TAVI over SAVR. However, risk profiles declined substantially. Significant improvements in early outcomes suggest favorable influence of less invasive access routes, improved device platforms and growing user experience.

Citing Articles

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.

VARC-3 defined outcome of valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation in stentless compared with stented aortic bioprostheses.

Steul J, Abdel-Wahab M, Stankowski T, Haussig S, Woitek F, Gasior T Clin Res Cardiol. 2023; .

PMID: 38078955 DOI: 10.1007/s00392-023-02347-5.

References

Mack M, Leon M, Thourani V, Makkar R, Kodali S, Russo M . Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Replacement with a Balloon-Expandable Valve in Low-Risk Patients. N Engl J Med. 2019; 380(18):1695-1705. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1814052. View

Chiang Y, Chikwe J, Moskowitz A, Itagaki S, Adams D, Egorova N . Survival and long-term outcomes following bioprosthetic vs mechanical aortic valve replacement in patients aged 50 to 69 years. JAMA. 2014; 312(13):1323-9. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2014.12679. View

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

Guo R, Xie M, Yim W, Wu W, Jiang W, Wang Y . Dose approach matter? A meta-analysis of outcomes following transfemoral versus transapical transcatheter aortic valve replacement. BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2021; 21(1):358. PMC: 8320184. DOI: 10.1186/s12872-021-02158-4. View

Popma J, Deeb G, Yakubov S, Mumtaz M, Gada H, OHair D . Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Replacement with a Self-Expanding Valve in Low-Risk Patients. N Engl J Med. 2019; 380(18):1706-1715. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1816885. View

Mehaffey J, Haywood N, Hawkins R, Kern J, Teman N, Kron I . Need for Permanent Pacemaker After Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement Reduces Long-Term Survival. Ann Thorac Surg. 2018; 106(2):460-465. PMC: 6057813. DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2018.02.041. View

Vahanian A, Beyersdorf F, Praz F, Milojevic M, Baldus S, Bauersachs J . 2021 ESC/EACTS Guidelines for the management of valvular heart disease. Eur Heart J. 2021; 43(7):561-632. DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehab395. View

Adams D, Popma J, Reardon M . Transcatheter aortic-valve replacement with a self-expanding prosthesis. N Engl J Med. 2014; 371(10):967-8. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMc1408396. View

Smith C, Leon M, Mack M, Miller D, Moses J, Svensson L . Transcatheter versus surgical aortic-valve replacement in high-risk patients. N Engl J Med. 2011; 364(23):2187-98. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1103510. View

10.

Yongue C, Lopez D, Soltesz E, Roselli E, Bakaeen F, Gillinov A . Durability and Performance of 2298 Trifecta Aortic Valve Prostheses: A Propensity-Matched Analysis. Ann Thorac Surg. 2020; 111(4):1198-1205. DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2020.07.040. View

11.

Blackman D, Saraf S, MacCarthy P, Myat A, Anderson S, Malkin C . Long-Term Durability of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Prostheses. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019; 73(5):537-545. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2018.10.078. View

12.

Leon M, Smith C, Mack M, Makkar R, Svensson L, Kodali S . Transcatheter or Surgical Aortic-Valve Replacement in Intermediate-Risk Patients. N Engl J Med. 2016; 374(17):1609-20. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1514616. View

13.

Di Martino L, Vletter W, Ren B, Schultz C, Van Mieghem N, Soliman O . Prediction of paravalvular leakage after transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015; 31(7):1461-8. PMC: 4572040. DOI: 10.1007/s10554-015-0703-1. View

14.

Fatima B, Mohananey D, Khan F, Jobanputra Y, Tummala R, Banerjee K . Durability Data for Bioprosthetic Surgical Aortic Valve: A Systematic Review. JAMA Cardiol. 2018; 4(1):71-80. DOI: 10.1001/jamacardio.2018.4045. View

15.

Otto C, Nishimura R, Bonow R, Carabello B, Erwin 3rd J, Gentile F . 2020 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Circulation. 2020; 143(5):e72-e227. DOI: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000923. View

16.

Schewel D, Frerker C, Schewel J, Wohlmuth P, Meincke F, Thielsen T . Clinical impact of paravalvular leaks on biomarkers and survival after transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2013; 85(3):502-14. DOI: 10.1002/ccd.25295. View

17.

Kim W, Bhumimuang K, Renker M, Fischer-Rasokat U, Mollmann H, Walther T . Determinants of paravalvular leakage following transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients with bicuspid and tricuspid aortic stenosis. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2021; . DOI: 10.1093/ehjci/jeab011. View

18.

Genereux P, Piazza N, Alu M, Nazif T, Hahn R, Pibarot P . Valve Academic Research Consortium 3: Updated Endpoint Definitions for Aortic Valve Clinical Research. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2021; 77(21):2717-2746. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2021.02.038. View

19.

Bleiziffer S, Ruge H, Mazzitelli D, Hutter A, Opitz A, Bauernschmitt R . Survival after transapical and transfemoral aortic valve implantation: talking about two different patient populations. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2009; 138(5):1073-80. DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2009.07.031. View

20.

Jorgensen T, Horsted Thyregod H, Ihlemann N, Nissen H, Petursson P, Kjeldsen B . Eight-year outcomes for patients with aortic valve stenosis at low surgical risk randomized to transcatheter vs. surgical aortic valve replacement. Eur Heart J. 2021; 42(30):2912-2919. PMC: 8347457. DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehab375. View