Key result
Transcatheter aortic valve replacement significantly improved early left ventricular efficiency at 1 week (SW/PVA 72.0%) compared to surgical replacement (69.1%), though both improved by 1 year.
Why the study?
Does TAVR improve cardiac energetics compared to SAVR in patients with severe aortic stenosis and preserved ejection fraction?
Cohort (n=117)
Does TAVR improve cardiac energetics compared to SAVR in patients with severe aortic stenosis and preserved ejection fraction?
TAVR provides earlier improvement in left ventricular efficiency and afterload compared to SAVR in patients with severe aortic stenosis, though both procedures yield satisfactory mid-term improvements.
TAVR may confer earlier LV efficiency gains than SAVR; leaves open clinical impact and requires randomized confirmation.
OBJECTIVES: The effect of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) on cardiac energetics has not been described. We compared changes in cardiac energetics after TAVR with those after surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). METHODS: We retrospectively estimated end-systolic elastance (Ees) and effective arterial elastance (Ea) using blood pressure and left ventricular (LV) volume obtained from echocardiography. LV efficiency [ventriculoarterial coupling (Ea/Ees) and the stroke work to pressure-volume area ratio (SW/PVA)] was calculated. Measurements were taken before, 1 week after and 1 year after bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement (TAVR, n = 56; SAVR, n = 61) in patients with severe aortic stenosis and preserved ejection fraction. RESULTS: Patients with TAVR had a lower aortic valve pressure gradient and larger stroke volume 1 week after the procedure than those with SAVR. Ea was more markedly decreased, and LV efficiency was significantly improved 1 week after TAVR (SW/PVA 68.1% ± 8.4% to 72.0% ± 8.5%, P < 0.001), but LV efficiency was unchanged 1 week after SAVR (SW/PVA 70.1% ± 7.4% to 69.1% ± 8.0%). LV efficiency was improved 1 year after both procedures (SW/PVA 75.5% ± 6.1% in TAVR; 74.7% ± 6.4% in SAVR). CONCLUSIONS: TAVR decreases the transvalvular pressure gradient further without deteriorating stroke volume in the early postoperative period, which is accompanied by early improvement in afterload and LV efficiency compared with SAVR. Improvement in LV efficiency at mid-term follow-up is satisfactory after both procedures.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yamashita et al. (2018) conducted a cohort in Severe aortic stenosis and preserved ejection fraction (n=117). Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) vs. Surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) was evaluated on Left ventricular efficiency (stroke work to pressure-volume area ratio [SW/PVA]) at 1 week (p=<0.001). Transcatheter aortic valve replacement significantly improved early left ventricular efficiency at 1 week (SW/PVA 72.0%) compared to surgical replacement (69.1%), though both improved by 1 year.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: