Retrospective analysis shows osteopenia affects long-term survival in TAVI candidates, indicating urgent risk assessment.
Background/Objectives: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a standard treatment for severe aortic stenosis, especially in older adults and high-risk patients. However, many TAVI candidates have osteopenia or osteoporosis, indicated by low bone mineral density (BMD), which is linked to frailty and adverse outcomes. Although prior research suggests an association with poor clinical outcomes, data remain limited. We investigated the impact of osteopenia on TAVI outcomes, hypothesizing that a lower BMD is associated with poor perioperative outcomes and decreased long-term survival. Methods: In this single-center retrospective study, we analyzed data from 411 patients who underwent TAVI at Yamaguchi University Hospital from 2014 to 2024. Clinical and survival data were collected, and Cox regression analysis was used to identify independent predictors of mortality. Preoperative BMD was measured using computed tomography, defining osteopenia as <135 Hounsfield units at L1. Patients were categorized as having mild, moderate, or severe osteopenia. Results: Early clinical outcomes and procedural success were similar; however, patients with osteopenia had longer intensive care unit stays (p = 0.04) and higher late cardiac mortality (p < 0.001). Six-year survival was 36.2% and 88.1% in patients with and without osteopenia, respectively (p < 0.0001). Cox regression analysis revealed osteopenia as a mortality risk factor (hazard ratio: 6.75, 95% confidence interval: 2.96–15.38, p < 0.0001). Severe osteopenia was associated with the poorest outcomes. Conclusions: Osteopenia is an independent predictor of poor long-term survival after TAVI. These findings underscore the importance of comprehensive risk assessment, suggesting that targeted interventions may improve outcomes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kurazumi et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: