Key result
TAVI plus PCI linked to ~37% lower 30-day but higher long-term mortality vs SAVR plus CABG.
Why the study?
To compare outcomes of complete transcatheter versus complete surgical approaches in patients with aortic stenosis and concomitant coronary artery disease.
Does a complete transcatheter approach (TAVI plus PCI) improve outcomes compared to a complete surgical approach (SAVR plus CABG) in patients with aortic stenosis and concomitant coronary artery disease?
Meta-Analysis (n=33,286)
Does a complete transcatheter approach (TAVI plus PCI) improve outcomes compared to a complete surgical approach (SAVR plus CABG) in patients with aortic stenosis and concomitant coronary artery disease?
Effect estimate: OR 0.63 (95% CI 0.51-0.80)
p-value: p=< .001
While TAVI plus PCI offers lower initial mortality and AKI rates compared to SAVR plus CABG, it is associated with significantly lower long-term survival and higher MACCE rates at 5 years.
May favor TAVI plus PCI for early survival yet increase long-term mortality; leaves open optimal strategy pending randomized trials.
OBJECTIVES: To compare outcomes of complete transcatheter (TAVI plus PCI) versus complete surgical (SAVR plus CABG) approach to treat patients with aortic stenosis (AS) and concomitant coronary artery disease (CAD). METHODS: Study-level meta-analysis with reconstructed time-to-event data including studies published by November 2021. The primary endpoints were 30-day mortality, overall survival, and major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE). The secondary endpoints were 30-day stroke, myocardial infarction, and permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI); in-hospital major vascular events and acute kidney injury (AKI). RESULTS: Eight studies met our eligibility criteria, including a total of 33,286 patients (3448 for TAVI plus PCI and 29,838 for SAVR plus CABG). The pooled risk of 30-day mortality was lower for TAVI plus PCI (OR 0.63; 95% CI 0.51-0.80; p < .001). Patients undergoing TAVI plus PCI had lower risk of in-hospital AKI (OR 0.49; 95% CI 0.28-0.85; p = .01), however, higher risk of major vascular events (OR 7.33; 95% CI 1.80-29.85; p = .005) and higher risk of PPI (OR 2.96; 95% CI 1.80-4.85; p < .001). No statistically significant difference was observed for myocardial infarction and stroke between the groups. In the follow-up analyses, we observed a higher risk of mortality (HR 1.64, 95% CI 1.36-1.96, p < .001) and MACCE with TAVI plus PCI (HR 1.35 (95% CI 1.08-1.69, p = .009). CONCLUSION: Patients who undergo TAVI plus PCI (in comparison with SAVR plus CABG) initially experience lower rates of in-hospital death and AKI; however, they experience significantly lower survival rates and more MACCE at 5-year follow up. Structural heart surgeons and interventional cardiologists should consider these aspects when referring patients for one approach or the other.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sá et al. (2022) conducted a meta-analysis in Aortic stenosis (AS) and concomitant coronary artery disease (CAD) (n=33,286). Complete transcatheter approach (TAVI plus PCI) vs. Complete surgical approach (SAVR plus CABG) was evaluated on 30-day mortality, overall survival, and major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.51-0.80, p=< .001). TAVI plus PCI was associated with lower 30-day mortality (OR 0.63; 95% CI 0.51-0.80) but higher long-term mortality (HR 1.64; 95% CI 1.36-1.96) compared to SAVR plus CABG.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: