Transcatheter aortic valve replacement outcomes in bicuspid compared to trileaflet aortic valves.
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Aortic Valve
/ abnormalities
Aortic Valve Stenosis
/ diagnostic imaging
Bicuspid Aortic Valve Disease
Databases, Factual
Female
Heart Valve Diseases
/ diagnostic imaging
Hospital Mortality
Humans
Length of Stay
Male
Middle Aged
Postoperative Complications
/ mortality
Risk Assessment
Risk Factors
Time Factors
Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement
/ adverse effects
Treatment Outcome
United States
/ epidemiology
Bicuspid aortic valves
Mortality
Periprocedural complication
Transcatheter aortic valve replacement
Journal
Cardiovascular revascularization medicine : including molecular interventions
ISSN: 1878-0938
Titre abrégé: Cardiovasc Revasc Med
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101238551
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 2019
01 2019
Historique:
received:
14
08
2018
revised:
11
09
2018
accepted:
12
09
2018
pubmed:
6
10
2018
medline:
12
2
2020
entrez:
6
10
2018
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
TAVR in patients with bicuspid aortic valves (BAV) is more challenging compared to individuals with trileaflet aortic valves (TAV). BAV have been excluded from the large randomized clinical trials assessing transcatheter aortic valve replacements (TAVR) and has been considered as a relative contraindication to TAVR. To report the outcomes of TAVR in BAV and compare them to TAV in the National Inpatient Sample (NIS). TAVR procedures were identified between 2011 and 2014 in the NIS dataset. Endpoints assessed included in-hospital mortality, periprocedural complications, length of stay and cost. Of 40,604 identified TAVR procedures, 407 (1%) were BAV and the 40,197 (99%) were TAV. Patients with BAV were younger and had a lower comorbidity burden. In hospital mortality (4.89% vs 4.17%, OR: 1.71, 95%CI: 0.57-5.12, P = 0.21), AMI (3.49% vs 3.58%, OR: 1.12, 95%CI: 0.36-3.54, P = 0.85), stroke and TIA (2.49% vs 3.55%, OR: 0.75, 95%CI: 0.18-3.16, P = 0.70), vascular complications (2.39% vs 5.58%, OR:0.47, 95%CI: 0.11-1.93, P = 0.29), major bleeding (16.96% vs 23.50%, OR: 0.63, 95%CI: 0.34-1.17, P = 0.15) and rates of permanent pacemaker (PPM) (9.88% vs 10.88%, OR: 1.19, 95%CI: 0.57-2.51, P = 0.64) were similar in both cohorts. With multimodality imaging and further improvement in technology, our study demonstrates off-label TAVR should not be considered prohibitive and can be successfully performed for BAV with similar peri-procedural outcomes compared to those with TAV. However, there is a need for robust large prospective studies.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30287215
pii: S1553-8389(18)30415-9
doi: 10.1016/j.carrev.2018.09.013
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Observational Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
50-56Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.