Why the study?
While TAVR improves symptoms in most patients with severe AS, some do not benefit from its symptom-reducing effects.
What are the predictors of poor symptomatic improvement after TAVR, and does poor symptomatic improvement affect subsequent clinical outcomes in patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis?
What are the predictors of poor symptomatic improvement after TAVR, and does poor symptomatic improvement affect subsequent clinical outcomes in patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis?
Poor symptomatic improvement after TAVR occurs in 6.6% of patients, is driven by specific comorbidities, and is associated with significantly worse 1-year clinical outcomes.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Comorbidity profiles may inform post-TAVR expectations; hypothesis-generating for targeted strategies to improve symptomatic response.
OBJECTIVE: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) improves clinical symptoms in most patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS). However, some patients do not benefit from the symptom-reducing effects of TAVR. We assessed the predictors and clinical outcomes of poor symptomatic improvement (SI) after TAVR. METHODS: A total of 1749 patients with severe symptomatic AS undergoing transfemoral TAVR were evaluated using the Japanese multicentre TAVR registry. Poor SI was defined as readmission for heart failure (HF) within 1 year after TAVR or New York Heart Association (NYHA) class ≥3 after 1 year. A logistic regression model was used to identify predictors of poor SI. One-year landmark analysis after TAVR was used to evaluate the association between poor SI and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Among the overall population (mean age, 84.5 years; female, 71.3%; mean STS score, 6.3%), 6.6% were categorised as having poor SI. Atrial fibrillation, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, Clinical Frailty Scale ≥4, chronic kidney disease and moderate to severe mitral regurgitation were independent predictors of poor SI. One-year landmark analysis demonstrated that poor SI had a higher incidence of all-cause death and readmission for HF compared with SI (p<0.001). Poor SI with preprocedural NYHA class 2 had a worse outcome than SI with preprocedural NYHA class ≥3. CONCLUSIONS: Poor SI was associated with worse outcomes 1 year after the procedure. It had a greater impact on clinical outcomes than baseline symptoms. TAVR may be challenging for patients with many predictors of poor SI. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: This registry, associated with the University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry, was accepted by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (UMIN-ID: 000020423).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yoshijima et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: