Key result
Transcatheter aortic valve implantation resulted in a 0.0% rate of 3-month major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events, lower than surgical replacement and medical therapy.
Why the study?
Does TAVI improve early clinical outcomes compared to SAVR or OMT in patients aged ≥80 years with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis?
Cohort (n=66)
No
Does TAVI improve early clinical outcomes compared to SAVR or OMT in patients aged ≥80 years with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis?
TAVI is associated with lower early adverse event rates compared to SAVR or medical therapy in selected octogenarians with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
TAVI may reduce early MACCE versus SAVR or OMT in octogenarians with severe AS; leaves open need for randomized confirmation in Asian cohorts.
PURPOSE: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has become an attractive therapeutic strategy for severe aortic stenosis (AS) in elderly patients due to its minimally-invasive nature. Therefore, early results of its clinical outcomes in elderly Korean patients were evaluated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We compared early clinical outcomes of TAVI, surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR), and optimal medical therapy (OMT) in patients aged≥80 years with symptomatic severe AS. Treatment groups were allocated as follows: TAVI (n=10), SAVR (n=14), and OMT (n=42). RESULTS: Baseline clinical characteristics including predicted operative mortality were similar among the three groups. However, patients with New York Heart Association functional class III or IV symptoms and smaller aortic valve area were treated with TAVI or SAVR rather than OMT. In-hospital combined safety endpoints (all-cause mortality, major stroke, peri-procedural myocardial infarction, life-threatening bleeding, major vascular complication, and acute kidney injury) after TAVI or SAVR were significantly lower in the TAVI group than in the SAVR group (10.0% vs. 71.4%, respectively, p=0.005), along with an acceptable rate of symptom improvement and device success. During the follow-up period, the TAVI group showed the lowest rate of 3-month major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events, a composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, major stroke, and re-hospitalization (TAVI 0.0% vs. SAVR 50.0% vs. OMT 42.9%, p=0.017). CONCLUSION: Treatment with TAVI was associated with lower event rates compared to SAVR or OMT. Therefore, TAVI may be considered as the first therapeutic strategy in selected patients aged≥80 years with symptomatic severe AS.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Im et al. (2013) conducted a cohort in Symptomatic severe aortic stenosis (n=66). Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) vs. Surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) or optimal medical therapy (OMT) was evaluated on 3-month major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) (p=0.017). Transcatheter aortic valve implantation resulted in a 0.0% rate of 3-month major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events, lower than surgical replacement and medical therapy.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: