Key result
Transcatheter aortic valve implantation was associated with similar 1-year mortality compared to surgical aortic valve replacement in octogenarians with severe aortic stenosis (10.3% vs. 6.7%, p=0.126).
Why the study?
TAVI is preferred for severe aortic stenosis in the elderly and patients with comorbidities, but a comparison of outcomes between TAVI and SAVR specifically in octogenarians was needed.
Does transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) improve 1-year mortality compared to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in octogenarians with severe aortic stenosis?
Cohort (n=542)
No
Does transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) improve 1-year mortality compared to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in octogenarians with severe aortic stenosis?
Absolute Event Rate: 10.3% vs 6.7%
p-value: p=0.126
In a real-world cohort of octogenarians with severe aortic stenosis, TAVI and SAVR demonstrated similar 1-year mortality, though they presented distinct periprocedural complication profiles.
TAVI may confer similar 1-year survival to SAVR in octogenarians; leaves open need for RCTs to weigh complication trade-offs.
Background Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is the preferred treatment option for severe aortic stenosis in the elderly and in patients with comorbidities. We sought to compare outcomes after TAVI and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in octogenarians. Methods In this retrospective cohort study conducted at our tertiary center, clinical data were gathered before and after TAVI and SAVR procedures performed from January 2013 to May 2019; follow-up completed in March 2021. The primary outcome was 1-year mortality. Patients were stratified according to Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score and procedure type. Propensity score-based matching was also performed. Results Of 542 patients who matched the inclusion criteria, 273 underwent TAVI and 269 SAVR. TAVI patients were older (85.8 ± 3.0 vs. 82.2 ± 2.2 years; P < 0.001) and had a higher mean STS score (5.0 ± 4.0 vs. 2.8 ± 1.3; P < 0.001) and EuroSCORE II (5.3 ± 4.1 vs. 2.8 ± 6.0; P < 0.001). Rates of postoperative permanent pacemaker insertion (15.0% vs. 9.3%; P = 0.040) and paravalvular leak (9.9% vs. 0.8%; P < 0.001) were higher and acute kidney injury lower (8.8% vs. 32.7%; P < 0.001) after TAVI, with no difference between treatment groups for major bleeding (11.0% vs. 6.7%; P = 0.130) or 30-day mortality (5.5% vs. 3.7%; P = 0.315). A statistically significant difference was found between TAVI and SAVR in low- and intermediate-risk groups when it came to occurrence of paravalvular leak, acute kidney injury, and new onset AF (all P < 0.001). Conclusion This analysis of an octogenarian “real-life” population undergoing TAVI or SAVR (with a biological valve) showed similar outcomes regarding clinical endpoints in low- and medium-risk (STS score) groups.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kolar et al. (2022) conducted a cohort in Severe aortic stenosis (n=542). Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) vs. Surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) was evaluated on 1-year mortality (p=0.126). Transcatheter aortic valve implantation was associated with similar 1-year mortality compared to surgical aortic valve replacement in octogenarians with severe aortic stenosis (10.3% vs. 6.7%, p=0.126).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: