E-resources
Peer reviewed
Open access
-
Almedimigh, Abdulmalik A.; Albabtain, Monirah A.; Alfayez, Latifa A.; Alsubaie, Faisal F.; Almoghairi, Abdulrahman; Alotaiby, Mohammad; Alkhushail, Abdullah; Ismail, Huda; Pragliola, Claudio; Adam, Adam I.; Arafat, Amr A.
The Cardiothoracic Surgeon, 12/2023, Volume: 31, Issue: 1Journal Article
Background The debate about the optimal approach for aortic valve replacement continues. We compared the hospital and long-term outcomes (survival, aortic valve reintervention, heart failure readmissions, and stroke) between transcatheter vs. surgical (TAVR vs. SAVR) aortic valve replacement. The study included 789 patients; 293 had isolated SAVR, and 496 had isolated TAVR. Patients with concomitant procedures were excluded. Propensity score matching identified 53 matched pairs. Results Patients who had TAVR were significantly older ( P ˂ 0.001) and had significantly higher EuroSCORE II ( P ˂ 0.001), NYHA class ( P ˂ 0.001), and more prevalence of diabetes mellitus ( P ˂ 0.001), hypertension ( P ˂ 0.001), chronic lung disease ( P = 0.001), recent myocardial infarction ( P = 0.002), and heart failure ( P ˂ 0.001), stroke ( P = 0.02), atrial fibrillation ( P = 0.004), and previous percutaneous coronary interventions ( P ˂ 0.001) than SAVR patients. In the matched cohort, atrial fibrillation occurred more frequently after SAVR ( P = 0.01), and hospital stay was significantly longer in SAVR patients ( P ˂ 0.001). There were no differences in hospital mortality between groups ( P ˃ 0.99). Survival at 1, 3, and 5 years was 97%, 95%, and 94% for SAVR and 91%, 79%, and 58% for TAVR patients. Survival was lower in TAVR patients before matching ( P ˂ 0.001) and after matching ( P = 0.045). Freedom from the composite endpoint of stroke, aortic valve reintervention, and heart failure readmission at 1, 3, and 5 years was 98.9%, 96%, and 94% for SAVR and 94%, 86%, and 75% for TAVR. The composite endpoint was significantly higher in the TAVR group than in SVR before matching ( P ˂ 0.001), while there was no difference after matching ( P = 0.07). There was no significant difference in the change in ejection fraction between groups ( β : −0.88 (95% CI : −2.20–0.43), P = 0.19), and the reduction of the aortic valve peak gradient was significantly higher with TAVR ( β : −7.80 (95% CI : −10.70 to −4.91); P ˂ 0.001). Conclusions TAVR could reduce postoperative atrial fibrillation and hospital stay. SAVR could have long-term survival benefits over TAVR with comparable long-term stroke, heart failure readmission, and aortic valve reinterventions between SAVR and TAVR.
Shelf entry
Permalink
- URL:
Impact factor
Access to the JCR database is permitted only to users from Slovenia. Your current IP address is not on the list of IP addresses with access permission, and authentication with the relevant AAI accout is required.
Year | Impact factor | Edition | Category | Classification | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
JCR | SNIP | JCR | SNIP | JCR | SNIP | JCR | SNIP |
Select the library membership card:
If the library membership card is not in the list,
add a new one.
DRS, in which the journal is indexed
Database name | Field | Year |
---|
Links to authors' personal bibliographies | Links to information on researchers in the SICRIS system |
---|
Source: Personal bibliographies
and: SICRIS
The material is available in full text. If you wish to order the material anyway, click the Continue button.