Key result
Community hospital TAVR shows similar 30-day mortality compared to national registry data.
Why the study?
Does TAVR performed in a community hospital yield comparable early outcomes to nationwide TAVR registry data in patients with severe aortic stenosis?
Observational (n=24,559)
Yes
Does TAVR performed in a community hospital yield comparable early outcomes to nationwide TAVR registry data in patients with severe aortic stenosis?
Absolute Event Rate: 0% vs 2.5%
p-value: p=0.410
TAVR can be performed safely in a community hospital setting with outcomes comparable to national registry data, despite treating older and more urgent patients.
Comparable mortality supports community TAVR feasibility in higher-risk patients; leaves open generalizability pending larger prospective studies.
Symptomatic aortic stenosis remains a surgical disease, with aortic valve replacement resulting in symptom reduction and improvement in survival. For patients who are deemed a higher surgical risk, Transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR) is a viable, less invasive and increasingly common alternative. The study compares early outcomes in patients treated within one year of the commencement of TAVR program in a community hospital against outcomes of TAVR patients from nationwide reported data (Society of Thoracic Surgeons/ American College of Cardiology TVT registry). Preoperative characteristics and standardized procedural outcomes of all patients who underwent TAVR in Cape Cod Hospital between June 2015 and May 2016 (n = 62, CCH group) were compared using standardized data format to those of TAVR patients operated during the same time period in other centers within the United States participating in the STS/ACC TVT Registry (n = 24,497, USA group). Most preoperative patient characteristics were similar between groups. However, CCH patients were older (age≥80 years: 77.4% versus 64.3%, p = 0.032) and more likely to be non-elective cases (37.1% versus 9.7%, p<0.001). All 62 TAVR procedures in CCH were performed in the catheterization laboratory unlike most (89.7%) of the procedures in the USA group that were performed in hybrid rooms. A larger proportion of patients in the USA registry underwent TAVR under general anesthesia (78.2% vs.37.1%, P<0.001). Early aortic valve re- intervention rate was 0/62 (0%) in the CCH group VS. 74/ 24,497 (0.3%) in the USA group. In hospital mortality, which was defined as death of any cause during thirty days from date of operation, (CCH: 0% vs. USA: 2.5%, p = 0.410) and occurrence of early adverse events (including postoperative para-valvular leaks, conduction defects requiring pacemakers, neurologic and renal complications) were similar in the two groups. The study concludes that with specific team training and co-ordination, and with active support of experienced personnel, high risk patients with severe aortic valve stenosis can be managed safely with a TAVR procedure in a community hospital.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Loberman et al. (2018) conducted an observational in Severe aortic valve stenosis (n=24,559). TAVR in a community hospital vs. TAVR in national registry centers was evaluated on In-hospital mortality (death of any cause during 30 days from operation) (p=0.410). TAVR performed in a community hospital resulted in similar 30-day in-hospital mortality compared to the national registry (0% vs. 2.5%, p=0.410).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: