Background: The study aim was to compare the outcome of transapical transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TaTAVR) and traditional aortic valve replacement (AVR) in redo from two real-world registries. Methods: The 30-day and follow up outcome of 462 patients enrolled in two multicenter redo registries, treated with redo-AVR (RAVR; n = 292 patients) or TaTAVR (n = 170 patients), were analyzed according to VARC-2 criteria, stratified also by propensity-matching analysis. Results: TaTAVR-patients were older and sicker than RAVR patients, and reported a higher all-cause 30-day mortality (p <0.01), a higher risk for all-cause mortality (p = 0.006) and cardiovascular mortality (p = 0.05) at follow up, but similar 30-day cardiovascular mortality (p = 0.12). Prolonged intubation (p <0.01) and Acute Kidney Injury Network (AKIN) 2/3 p = 0.02) prevailed in RAVR. TaTAVR patients reported a higher level of major/life-threatening/disabling bleeding (p <0.01) and 'early safety-events' (ES) (p = 0.04). Thirty-day acute myocardial infarction (AMI), stroke, and follow up freedom from acute heart failure (AHF), from stroke and from reinterventions were similar (p = NS). The NYHA class was better after RAVR (p <0.01). The intermediate-to-high risk (Logistic EuroSCORE RAVR 17.1 ± 8.5; TaTAVR 16.0 ± 17.0) propensity-matched population demonstrated comparable 30-day and follow up all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, ES, AMI, stroke, prolonged intubation, follow up freedom from AHF, from stroke and from reinterventions and NYHA class. TaTAVR still reported lower levels of AKIN 2/3 (2.2% versus 15.6%, p = 0.03) and shorter hospitalization (9.5 ± 3.4 days versus 12.0 ± 7.0 days, p = 0.03). Conclusions: Outcome differences between RAVR and TaTAVR in redo-scenarios reflect methodological differences and different baseline risk profiles. Propensity-matched patients showed a better renal outcome after TaTAVR. *Drs. Onorati and D'Onofrio contributed equally to this article and should both be considered as first authors.
Onorati, F., D'Onofrio, A., Biancari, F., Salizzoni, S., De Feo, M., Agrifoglio, M., et al. (2015). Aortic Valve Replacement in Redo-Scenarios: A Comparison Between Traditional Aortic Valve Replacement (TAVR) and Transapical-TAVR from Two Real-World Multicenter Registries. JOURNAL OF HEART VALVE DISEASE, 24(6).
Aortic Valve Replacement in Redo-Scenarios: A Comparison Between Traditional Aortic Valve Replacement (TAVR) and Transapical-TAVR from Two Real-World Multicenter Registries
D'Onofrio, Augusto
;
2015-01-01
Abstract
Background: The study aim was to compare the outcome of transapical transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TaTAVR) and traditional aortic valve replacement (AVR) in redo from two real-world registries. Methods: The 30-day and follow up outcome of 462 patients enrolled in two multicenter redo registries, treated with redo-AVR (RAVR; n = 292 patients) or TaTAVR (n = 170 patients), were analyzed according to VARC-2 criteria, stratified also by propensity-matching analysis. Results: TaTAVR-patients were older and sicker than RAVR patients, and reported a higher all-cause 30-day mortality (p <0.01), a higher risk for all-cause mortality (p = 0.006) and cardiovascular mortality (p = 0.05) at follow up, but similar 30-day cardiovascular mortality (p = 0.12). Prolonged intubation (p <0.01) and Acute Kidney Injury Network (AKIN) 2/3 p = 0.02) prevailed in RAVR. TaTAVR patients reported a higher level of major/life-threatening/disabling bleeding (p <0.01) and 'early safety-events' (ES) (p = 0.04). Thirty-day acute myocardial infarction (AMI), stroke, and follow up freedom from acute heart failure (AHF), from stroke and from reinterventions were similar (p = NS). The NYHA class was better after RAVR (p <0.01). The intermediate-to-high risk (Logistic EuroSCORE RAVR 17.1 ± 8.5; TaTAVR 16.0 ± 17.0) propensity-matched population demonstrated comparable 30-day and follow up all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, ES, AMI, stroke, prolonged intubation, follow up freedom from AHF, from stroke and from reinterventions and NYHA class. TaTAVR still reported lower levels of AKIN 2/3 (2.2% versus 15.6%, p = 0.03) and shorter hospitalization (9.5 ± 3.4 days versus 12.0 ± 7.0 days, p = 0.03). Conclusions: Outcome differences between RAVR and TaTAVR in redo-scenarios reflect methodological differences and different baseline risk profiles. Propensity-matched patients showed a better renal outcome after TaTAVR. *Drs. Onorati and D'Onofrio contributed equally to this article and should both be considered as first authors.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.