» Articles » PMID: 39604671

Availability of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Across Hospitals and Differences in Strategies and Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Severe Aortic Stenosis

Abstract

There was a scarcity of data evaluating variations in treatment approaches and clinical outcomes for severe aortic stenosis (AS) between medical centers with and without availability of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Current study population was 2993 patients with severe AS enrolled in the CURRENT AS Registry-2 (2581 patients from 10 TAVI centers; 412 patients from 10 non-TAVI centers). TAVI centers more frequently opted for the initial aortic valve replacement (AVR) strategy compared to non-TAVI centers (60% and 40%, P < 0.001). Among patients with the initial AVR strategy, TAVI centers disproportionately favored the initial TAVI strategy compared to non-TAVI centers (71% and 23%, P < 0.001). No significant differences were observed in the risk of a composite of all-cause death or heart failure hospitalization between TAVI and non-TAVI centers in the entire study population (cumulative 3-year incidence: 32.0% and 31.0%, P = 0.37; adjusted hazard ratios: 0.92, 95% confidence intervals: 0.74-1.15, P = 0.45) or in conservative, initial AVR, initial surgical AVR, and initial TAVI strata. A substantial disparity exists in the treatment strategies for patients with severe AS between TAVI and non-TAVI centers. TAVI centers tended to perform AVR, particularly TAVI, earlier and more frequently. However, there was no discernible distinction in the risk of the composite of all-cause death or HF hospitalization between TAVI and non-TAVI centers. UMINID: UMIN000034169.

References
1.
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

2.
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

3.
Makkar R, Thourani V, Mack M, Kodali S, Kapadia S, Webb J . Five-Year Outcomes of Transcatheter or Surgical Aortic-Valve Replacement. N Engl J Med. 2020; 382(9):799-809. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1910555. View

4.
Leon M, Mack M, Hahn R, Thourani V, Makkar R, Kodali S . Outcomes 2 Years After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients at Low Surgical Risk. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2021; 77(9):1149-1161. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2020.12.052. View

5.
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