Key result
Routine pre-emptive percutaneous coronary intervention in TAVI candidates lacks a clear survival benefit and increases bleeding risks compared to conservative management.
Why the study?
Routine invasive coronary angiography and peri-procedural PCI carry notable risks and questionable benefit in TAVI patients, raising whether CT angiography alone can safely rule out significant proximal CAD.
Does pre-emptive percutaneous coronary intervention improve clinical outcomes in TAVI candidates with stable coronary artery disease?
Does pre-emptive percutaneous coronary intervention improve clinical outcomes in TAVI candidates with stable coronary artery disease?
Routine invasive coronary angiography and pre-emptive PCI for stable CAD in TAVI candidates lacks a mortality benefit and may be safely substituted with CT angiography in selected patients.
May support deferring routine pre-emptive PCI in TAVI candidates; leaves open CT angiography substitution pending prospective trials.
Coronary artery disease (CAD) remains one of the most frequent comorbidities among transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) candidates. Whether routine assessment of CAD by invasive coronary angiography (CA) and eventual peri-procedural percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is generally beneficial in TAVI patients has recently been heavily questioned. CA carries significant risks, such as kidney injury, bleeding, and prolonged hospital stay, and may frequently be unnecessary if significant stenoses of the proximal coronary segments can be ruled out on computed tomography angiography. Moreover, the benefits of pre-emptive coronary revascularization at the time of TAVI are not well defined. Despite these facts and weak guideline recommendations, CA and eventual PCI of stable significant coronary lesions at the time of TAVI remain common practice. However, ongoing randomized trials currently challenge the efficacy of such strategies to enable a more streamlined, individualized, and resource-sparing treatment with TAVI.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mascherbauer et al. (2024) conducted a review in Coronary artery disease in TAVI candidates. Pre-emptive percutaneous coronary intervention and routine invasive coronary angiography vs. Conservative medical management and CT angiography was evaluated. Routine pre-emptive percutaneous coronary intervention in TAVI candidates lacks a clear survival benefit and increases bleeding risks compared to conservative management.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: