Key result
Transcatheter aortic valve implantation in kidney transplant recipients resulted in significantly less acute graft failure than surgical replacement (45% vs. 89.5%; p=0.006) and zero graft loss.
Why the study?
SAVR in kidney transplant recipients carries high morbidity, mortality, and risk of graft failure, but data on TAVI in these patients are limited.
Does transcatheter aortic valve implantation improve patient and graft survival compared to surgical aortic valve replacement in kidney transplant recipients with severe aortic stenosis?
Cohort (n=40)
No
Does transcatheter aortic valve implantation improve patient and graft survival compared to surgical aortic valve replacement in kidney transplant recipients with severe aortic stenosis?
In kidney transplant recipients with severe aortic stenosis, TAVI is associated with significantly lower rates of acute graft failure and graft loss compared to SAVR, while maintaining comparable long-term patient survival.
TAVI may reduce graft complications in kidney transplant recipients; leaves open survival benefit pending randomized confirmation.
Surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in kidney transplant recipients (KTR) is associated with high morbidity and mortality, and an increased risk of postoperative graft failure potentially leading to graft loss. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) emerged as an alternative in high-risk patients. However, data on TAVI in kidney transplant recipients are limited. We performed a retrospective analysis of 40 KTR in which aortic valve replacement was performed at our center between 2005 and 2015. The outcomes and follow-up of TAVI (n=20; 2010-2015) and SAVR (n=20; 2005-2015) were analyzed with respect to patient and graft survival. Baseline characteristics in both groups were comparable. Hospital stay after TAVI was significantly shorter compared to SAVR (19 [11.5-21.75] days vs. 33 [21-62] days, p=0.001). Acute graft failure occurred more frequently after SAVR (45% vs. 89.5%; p=0.006). Thirty-day mortality was 10% in both groups. However, in-hospital mortality reached 25% in the SAVR group (TAVI 10%), indicating a more complicated course after surgery. Moreover, during a median follow-up time of 1928 days in TAVI patients and 2717 days in patients after SAVR, graft loss occurred only in the surgically treated group (n=7). While one-year survival after TAVR was 90% compared to 69% after SAVR, long-term follow-up showed comparable results (at 5 years: TAVI 58% vs. 52% SAVR; log-rank-test: p=0.86). In KTR, TAVI can be performed with good mid- to long-term results. Compared to SAVR, renal outcomes seem to be improved after TAVI, suggesting better graft survival.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Büttner et al. (2022) conducted a cohort in Kidney transplant recipients requiring aortic valve replacement (n=40). Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) vs. Surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) was evaluated on Acute graft failure (p=0.006). Transcatheter aortic valve implantation in kidney transplant recipients resulted in significantly less acute graft failure than surgical replacement (45% vs. 89.5%; p=0.006) and zero graft loss.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: