Key result
In patients undergoing TAVI, those with radiation-induced aortic stenosis had significantly lower 6-month overall mortality compared to those with degenerative stenosis (0% vs 18%; p=0.048).
Why the study?
Does TAVI improve outcomes and provide acceptable safety in patients with radiation-induced aortic stenosis compared to those with degenerative aortic stenosis?
Cohort (n=198)
Does TAVI improve outcomes and provide acceptable safety in patients with radiation-induced aortic stenosis compared to those with degenerative aortic stenosis?
Absolute Event Rate: 0% vs 18%
p-value: p=0.048
TAVI is a feasible, safe, and effective treatment option for patients with radiation-induced aortic stenosis who are contraindicated for surgery, demonstrating excellent mid-term survival.
Hypothesis-generating for TAVI outcomes by aortic stenosis etiology; requires prospective validation before clinical adoption.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) feasibility, effectiveness and safety in radiation-induced aortic valve stenosis cases. METHODS: 198 consecutive patients referred for TAVI were prospectively enrolled. They were divided into two groups: patients with a history of chest radiation therapy with suspected radiation-induced valvular disease (RXT) and others with suspected degenerative aortic valve stenosis (NRXT). Procedural, early and mid-term clinical outcomes were compared. RESULTS: Of the 198 patients enrolled in our study, 9.6% qualified for inclusion in the RXT group. A comparison of baseline characteristics revealed that patients with RXT were younger than patients with NRXT (68.3 vs 82.5 years; p<0.05) and exhibited a lower surgical risk score (Euroscore: 7.1% vs 21.8%; p<0.05) and a higher frequency of hostile thorax and porcelain aorta (52.6% vs 28.5%; p<0.05; 63.2% vs 10.6%; p<0.05, respectively). In both groups, the implantation success rate was high and the 30-day safety end point acceptable (RXT: 94.7% and 83.3%; NRXT: 93.9% and 75.6%, respectively). At 6 months, overall mortality was significantly lower in the RXT group (0% vs 18%; p=0.048). CONCLUSIONS: In patients suffering from radiation-induced aortic valve stenosis and contraindicated for surgery, TAVI is a promising approach, with high feasibility, acceptable risk, low mortality and high clinical effectiveness at mid-term follow-up.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dijos et al. (2015) conducted a cohort in Aortic valve stenosis (n=198). Radiation-induced aortic valve stenosis vs. Degenerative aortic valve stenosis was evaluated on Overall mortality at 6 months (p=0.048). In patients undergoing TAVI, those with radiation-induced aortic stenosis had significantly lower 6-month overall mortality compared to those with degenerative stenosis (0% vs 18%; p=0.048).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: