Transcatheter Versus Surgical Valve Replacement: A 24-months Propensity-matched Analysis of the SILCARD Registry.
Journal
Anatolian journal of cardiology
ISSN: 2149-2271
Titre abrégé: Anatol J Cardiol
Pays: Turkey
ID NLM: 101652981
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Mar 2022
Mar 2022
Historique:
entrez:
29
3
2022
pubmed:
30
3
2022
medline:
6
4
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Data concerning the comparison between transcatheter aortic valve implantation and surgical aortic valve replacement in a real-world setting are scarce and in Central and Eastern Europe no such data exist. In this study, we aimed at analyzing retrospectively the characteristics and outcome of patients with aortic stenosis treated either with surgical aortic valve replacement or transcatheter aortic valve implantation between 2006 and 2016 in the Silesian Province, Poland in a representative real-world cohort. In the Silesian Cardiovascular Database we retrospectively identified 5186 patients who received either transcatheter aortic valve implantation or surgical aortic valve replacement in 1 of 3 tertiary cardiovascular centers. Baseline characteristics, including relevant clinical history, and outcomes were compared before and after propensity-score matching of both groups, with 348 pairs of patients constituting the propensity-matched study cohort. The primary end-point was 24-month all-cause mortality. Preoperative characteristics of propensity-matched groups were similar. There was no difference between transcatheter aortic valve implantation and surgical aortic valve replacement groups with respect to the death rate at 2 years (19.9% vs. 15.6%; P =.479). In the transcatheter aortic valve implantation group, cardiac resynchronization therapy devices were more frequently implanted after the procedure (3.7% vs. 0.0, P <.001). The groups had similar rates of myocardial infarction, stroke, and re-hospitalization. Hospital stay in the matched groups was shorter after transcatheter aortic valve implantation: 14.1 versus 15.7 days (P <.001). At 24 months, transcatheter aortic valve implantation patients had similar outcomes as surgical aortic valve replacement except for a higher rate of cardiac resynchronization therapy device implantation and shorter hospital stay.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Data concerning the comparison between transcatheter aortic valve implantation and surgical aortic valve replacement in a real-world setting are scarce and in Central and Eastern Europe no such data exist. In this study, we aimed at analyzing retrospectively the characteristics and outcome of patients with aortic stenosis treated either with surgical aortic valve replacement or transcatheter aortic valve implantation between 2006 and 2016 in the Silesian Province, Poland in a representative real-world cohort.
METHODS
METHODS
In the Silesian Cardiovascular Database we retrospectively identified 5186 patients who received either transcatheter aortic valve implantation or surgical aortic valve replacement in 1 of 3 tertiary cardiovascular centers. Baseline characteristics, including relevant clinical history, and outcomes were compared before and after propensity-score matching of both groups, with 348 pairs of patients constituting the propensity-matched study cohort. The primary end-point was 24-month all-cause mortality.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Preoperative characteristics of propensity-matched groups were similar. There was no difference between transcatheter aortic valve implantation and surgical aortic valve replacement groups with respect to the death rate at 2 years (19.9% vs. 15.6%; P =.479). In the transcatheter aortic valve implantation group, cardiac resynchronization therapy devices were more frequently implanted after the procedure (3.7% vs. 0.0, P <.001). The groups had similar rates of myocardial infarction, stroke, and re-hospitalization. Hospital stay in the matched groups was shorter after transcatheter aortic valve implantation: 14.1 versus 15.7 days (P <.001).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
At 24 months, transcatheter aortic valve implantation patients had similar outcomes as surgical aortic valve replacement except for a higher rate of cardiac resynchronization therapy device implantation and shorter hospital stay.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35346903
doi: 10.5152/AnatolJCardiol.2021.83009
pmc: PMC9366412
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
172-179Références
N Engl J Med. 2010 Oct 21;363(17):1597-607
pubmed: 20961243
Eur Heart J. 2017 Sep 21;38(36):2739-2791
pubmed: 28886619
Pol Arch Intern Med. 2018 Dec 21;128(12):739-745
pubmed: 30335053
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019 Aug 27;74(8):1086-1106
pubmed: 31439219
N Engl J Med. 2012 May 3;366(18):1686-95
pubmed: 22443479
N Engl J Med. 2019 May 2;380(18):1706-1715
pubmed: 30883053
Pol Arch Med Wewn. 2016 Sep 20;126(10):754-762
pubmed: 27650214
Circulation. 2002 Dec 10;106(24):3006-8
pubmed: 12473543
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2018 Aug 1;92(2):408-416
pubmed: 29388308
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2015 Oct;86(4):738-44
pubmed: 25641398
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2017 Oct 1;52(4):616-664
pubmed: 29156023
Int J Cardiol. 2016 Oct 1;220:320-7
pubmed: 27390949
N Engl J Med. 2019 May 2;380(18):1695-1705
pubmed: 30883058
Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2016 May;9(5):e003326
pubmed: 27154298
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017 Jul 25;70(4):439-450
pubmed: 28728688
N Engl J Med. 2012 May 3;366(18):1696-704
pubmed: 22443478
N Engl J Med. 2016 Aug 18;375(7):700-1
pubmed: 27532839
N Engl J Med. 2017 Jul 13;377(2):197-198
pubmed: 28700842
N Engl J Med. 2011 Jun 9;364(23):2187-98
pubmed: 21639811
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020 Nov 17;76(20):2391-2411
pubmed: 33190683