Why the study?
Anemia is common in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement, but the relationship between hemoglobin levels, procedural risk, and mortality after TAVR needed definition.
Do baseline hemoglobin levels predict post-TAVR complications or in-hospital death in patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing TAVR?
Do baseline hemoglobin levels predict post-TAVR complications or in-hospital death in patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing TAVR?
Baseline hemoglobin levels do not appear to predict post-TAVR complications or in-hospital mortality in patients with severe aortic stenosis.
Hb stratification shows no TAVR outcome differences; leaves open whether anemia correction affects prognosis in larger trials.
Background: Anemia is a prevalent comorbidity in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement. Objectives: The objectives of this study were to define baseline parameters of patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) to determine procedural risk and mortality outcomes stratified by hemoglobin (Hb) levels. Methods: Retrospective study of a population of patients with severe AS undergoing TAVR with the Edwards SAPIEN 3 valve between 2018 and 2021 at Sabah Al-Ahmad Cardiac Centre, Al Amiri Hospital, Kuwait. Two cohorts were identified based on Hb level: Hb <13 and Hb ≥13 g/dl. Results: A total of 61 patients were included. The mean age was 73.5 ± 9.0 years, with a higher prevalence of females. The cohort with lower Hb had lower body surface area (2.0 ± 0.1 vs. 1.8 ± 0.2, P = 0.035) and bioprosthesis size (26.5 ± 1.8 vs. 24.4 ± 1.8, P = 0.001). Based on echocardiography, patients with higher Hb levels had a higher prevalence of aortic regurgitation in addition to stenosis ( P = 0.029). Conclusions: Baseline anemia is a common comorbidity in patients with severe AS undergoing TAVR. However, in terms of procedural outcomes and mortality, Hb levels were not a predictor of post-TAVR complications or in-hospital death.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Haroun et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: