Patients younger than 70 undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation: Procedural outcomes and mid-term survival
Why the study?
Indications for TAVI are expanding to younger, lower-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis, who have traditionally been under-represented in the literature.
Does TAVI with 2nd generation devices improve procedural outcomes and mid-term survival compared to 1st generation devices in patients younger than 70 with severe aortic stenosis?
Comparison
1st generation vs 2nd generation devices
Design
Single-center retrospective study
Follow-up
3 years
Authors
Discussion
Loading...
Member takes
Implication
TAVI appears feasible with low complications and acceptable mid-term survival in selected patients <70; leaves open durability questions versus surgery in expanding lower-risk cohorts.
Structured PICO
Does TAVI with 2nd generation devices improve procedural outcomes and mid-term survival compared to 1st generation devices in patients younger than 70 with severe aortic stenosis?
P
Population
129 consecutive patients younger than 70 years of age with severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis who underwent TAVI at a single tertiary referral center between 2007 and 2019.
I
Intervention
Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with 2nd generation devices (n=71)
C
Comparator
Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with 1st generation devices (n=58)
O
Outcome
Procedural outcomes (device success rate) and mid-term survival (3-year all-cause mortality)hard clinical
TAVI is a safe and feasible procedure in patients younger than 70 years with appropriate indications, showing good mid-term survival and low re-intervention rates regardless of device generation.
Cite This Study
Ancona et al. (2021) studied this question.