Key result
Porcelain aorta was not associated with a significant increase in 30-day mortality (OR 1.01) or stroke compared to non-calcific aorta in patients undergoing TAVR.
Why the study?
Data on the prognostic significance of porcelain aorta among TAVR recipients are limited, and its association with adverse short-term outcomes following TAVR remains unclear.
Does porcelain aorta increase 30-day mortality and stroke in patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis undergoing TAVR?
Cohort (n=2,037)
No
Does porcelain aorta increase 30-day mortality and stroke in patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis undergoing TAVR?
Odds Ratio: 1.01 (95% CI 0.97–1.04)
Absolute Event Rate: 5% vs 1%
p-value: p=0.778
Porcelain aorta does not appear to significantly increase the short-term risk of mortality or stroke in patients undergoing TAVR, though it is associated with longer hospital stays.
Background and Objectives: Patients with porcelain aorta (PA) pose major surgical challenges during aortic valve replacement, making transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) the preferred alternative. However, data on the prognostic significance of PA among TAVR recipients are limited. This study sought to evaluate whether PA is associated with adverse short-term outcomes following TAVR. Materials and Methods: Consecutive, surgery-naïve patients who underwent TAVR between 2012 and 2020 at a single institution were retrospectively analyzed. Based on preoperative CT scans, patients were categorized as having either porcelain aorta (PA) or non-calcific aorta (NC). Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to minimize baseline differences, with standardized mean differences (SMD) < 0.1 indicating adequate covariate balance. Logistic regression addressed residual post-IPTW imbalances. Results: A total of 2037 patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis were identified, of whom 40 (2%) had PA. Compared to the NC population, PA patients were more likely to be younger (p = 0.002), had a higher prevalence of heart failure symptoms (p = 0.041) and peripheral artery disease (p = 0.006). After adjustment for preoperative characteristics, no significant differences were observed between groups in post-TAVR mortality (p = 0.498), stroke (p = 0.606), or postoperative creatinine levels (p = 0.827). However, PA patients experienced significantly longer in-hospital (p < 0.001) and ICU (p < 0.001) lengths of stay. Conclusions: In this single-center cohort, PA did not appear to confer additional risk of mortality, stroke or renal failure, although it remained associated with longer postoperative in-hospital and ICU lengths of stays. TAVR appears to be a safe and effective method of AVR when significant circumferential atherosclerotic aortic calcification precludes aortic cross-clamping.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tagliafierro et al. (2026) conducted a cohort in Severe symptomatic aortic stenosis undergoing TAVR (n=2,037). Porcelain aorta vs. Non-calcific aorta was evaluated on 30-day all-cause mortality (OR 1.01, 95% CI 0.97-1.04, p=0.778). Porcelain aorta was not associated with a significant increase in 30-day mortality (OR 1.01) or stroke compared to non-calcific aorta in patients undergoing TAVR.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: