Key result
TAVR is linked to ~4% early mortality and more pacemakers versus surgical AVR in octogenarians.
Why the study?
Does transcatheter aortic valve replacement improve clinical outcomes compared to conventional surgical aortic valve replacement in patients aged 80 years or older?
Cohort (n=108)
No
Does transcatheter aortic valve replacement improve clinical outcomes compared to conventional surgical aortic valve replacement in patients aged 80 years or older?
Absolute Event Rate: 4.1% vs 0%
TAVR is a viable alternative to surgical AVR in patients over 80, but is associated with higher rates of permanent pacemaker insertion, paravalvular leakage, and cardiac readmissions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
TAVR linked to higher early mortality and pacemaker needs vs surgical AVR in octogenarians; leaves open optimal choice pending randomized trials.
Lee et al. (2017) conducted a cohort in Aortic valve disease (n=108). Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) vs. Surgical aortic valve replacement (AVR) was evaluated on Early mortality. In patients aged ≥80 years, TAVR resulted in 4.1% early mortality compared to 0% with surgical AVR, and was associated with significantly more permanent pacemaker insertions (p=0.010).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: