Why the study?
Defining the TAVR learning curve has important implications for centers starting programs as procedural demand grows, yet no single-center nonPARTNER-I trial learning curve across consecutive device generations had been reported.
Does early institutional experience with first-generation balloon-expandable transfemoral TAVR devices carry over to reduce the learning curve and procedure time for subsequent second- and third-generation TAVR devices?
Cohort (n=616)
No
Does early institutional experience with first-generation balloon-expandable transfemoral TAVR devices carry over to reduce the learning curve and procedure time for subsequent second- and third-generation TAVR devices?
A heart team's initial learning curve with first-generation transfemoral balloon-expandable TAVR (achieving efficiency by case 40 and mastery by case 60) carries over to subsequent second- and third-generation devices without requiring a new learning curve.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Single-center TAVR learning curve data remain hypothesis-generating; multicenter studies needed before guiding new program initiation.
Background: There will be an increasing demand for TAVR in the years to come. Defining the learning curve for this procedure carries implications for centers looking to begin TAVR programs. There has yet to be a single center nonPARTNER-I trial TAVR learning curve in the literature. The purpose of this study is to elucidate the efficiency and mastery of one heart team at a single nonPARTNER-I trial institution using consecutive generations of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) devices. Methods: In a retrospective, observational, study from 2012-2017, we reviewed data on 920 patients who underwent TAVR at our institution. Excluded were the self-expanding TAVR valves and non-transfemoral access TAVRs. We used three complementary methods (CUSUM analysis, penalized B-splines regression, and generalized linear model) on the remaining 616 patients to define the learning curve for the first 100 consecutive patients using the first (Cohort 1), second (Cohort 2) and third (Cohort 3) generation balloon-expandable TAVR valves. Findings: In Cohort 1, the median procedure time was 178.5 minutes. Efficiency was achieved at case 40 and mastery at case 60. The first 100 consecutive patients in Cohort 2 had a median procedure time of 73 minutes. The first 100 consecutive patients in Cohort 3 had a median procedure time of 92 minutes. There was no additional level of efficiency or mastery after the first generation TAVR valves. Conclusion: In conclusion, given the growing number of eligible patients and expanding indications for TAVR, there will be an increased demand for TAVR. Early experience using the first generation TAVR device carried over to subsequent generations of TAVR devices.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Giorgio A. Medranda (2018) conducted a cohort in Aortic stenosis undergoing transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) (n=616). Second and third generation balloon-expandable transfemoral TAVR valves vs. First generation balloon-expandable transfemoral TAVR valves was evaluated on Procedure time and learning curve (efficiency and mastery).
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: