TAVI in younger patients: is it a reliable option?

Abstract Funding Acknowledgements None. Background/Introduction Severe aortic stenosis is the most common valve disease requiring intervention. It has very poor prognosis, and early intervention is recommended. Either surgical or percutaneous transcatheter intervention is possible. According to European guidelines, surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) is usually indicated for patients younger than 75 years old. However, some patients are refused surgery, and transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) might be an option of treatment for these patients, however medium-long term results are still uncertain. Purpose This study intends to evaluate the efficacy and safety of TAVI in younger patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis. Methods Retrospective cohort of 224 patients were submitted to TAVI in the last 3 years, of which 21 patients were younger than 75 years old. The primary endpoints are mortality, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and rehospitalization (related to the procedure, valve, or heart failure). Efficacy and safety were evaluated during a follow-up of at least 6 months, compared with the traditional group. Results A total of 224 patients underwent TAVI during the last 3 years at our center. Of these, 21 patients (9%) were younger than 75 years. The mean age was 72,1±3 62-75 years old and 33% were female (n=7). 95% (n=20) of the TAVI procedures were due to degenerative severe aortic stenosis and 5% (n=1) due to degenerative aortic surgical valve prothesis. The mean euroscore risk value was 6,2±1,3%, and 18 patients were refused for surgery (86%) and 3 patients refused surgery (14%). All procedures were performed by transfemoral access, with 2 peripheral access complications (9,5%), 1 hemorrhagic (4%), solved with covered stent, and 1 closure device occlusion solved with wire crossing and balloon inflation (4%). It was necessary to implant 3 temporary pacemakers, however, only 2 patients required a definitive pacemaker implantation (9,5%). There were no cases intraprocedural death, MACE or aortic severe complications. There was a statistically significant reduction of risk of peripheral complications and pacemaker implantation on younger patients comparing with older patients (p=0,04 and p=0,05 respectively). Mean follow-up time was 14±8,3 months 6-39 months. During follow-up there were no deaths, MACE or episodes of rehospitalization due to heart failure recorded. Regarding echocardiographic evaluation, there were no cases of significant valve degeneration, with mean aortic gradient of 13±4,1mmHg, no significant leakage or other echocardiographic findings. In younger patients, TAVI appears to be also valid therapeutic option, with less risk of peripheral access complication or need of permanent pacemaker implantation. During the follow-up there was no cases of prothesis degeneration, proving to be a reliable option for the medium to long term.