PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
June 5, 2024Circulation Cardiovascular Interventions43 citations

Impact of Cerebral Embolic Protection Devices on Disabling Stroke after Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Updated Results from the STS/ACC TVT Registry

View Full Paper
NBNeel M. ButalaSKSamir KapadiaESEric A. Secemsky

Key Points

Key points are not available for this paper at this time.

Abstract

Background: Cerebral embolic protection devices (EPDs) were developed to mitigate the risk of stroke during transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), but their benefit remains unproven. In the PROTECTED-TAVR trial, EPD use did not reduce periprocedural stroke (primary study outcome) but led to a 62% reduction in the secondary endpoint of disabling stroke. Given these results, the impact of EPDs during TAVR remains unclear. Methods: We used STS/ACC TVT registry data to examine the association between EPD use and a proxy for disabling stroke among transfemoral TAVR patients between 1/2018-6/2023. The primary outcome was in-hospital disabling stroke—defined as stroke associated with either in-hospital death or discharge to a non-home location. We evaluated the association between EPD use and disabling stroke using instrumental variable (IV) analysis with site-level preference for EPD use as the instrument—a quasi-experimental approach that can support causal inference. In addition, we performed a propensity-score based comparison using overlap weighting as a secondary analysis. Results: The study population consisted of 414,649 patients of whom 53,389 (12.9%) received an EPD. The unadjusted rate of in-hospital disabling stroke was 0.7% among the EPD group and 0.9% in the no EPD group. EPD use was associated with a reduction in disabling stroke in both IV analysis (RR 0.87; 95% CI: 0.73-1.00) and propensity-weighted (PW) analysis (OR 0.79; 95% CI: 0.70-0.90) but was not associated with a reduction in non-disabling stroke. In subgroup analyses, the benefit of EPD was greater among those with versus without prior stroke (interaction p<0.05 for IV and PW). Conclusions: In the largest study to date, among patients undergoing TAVR, EPD use was associated with a small, borderline significant reduction in stroke associated with death or a discharge to a non-home location (a proxy for disabling stroke) that is likely to be causal in nature. Taken together with previous mechanistic and clinical studies, these findings provide credible evidence that EPDs benefit patients undergoing TAVR.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Butala et al. (2024) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/68e65f84b6db6435875ed4eehttps://doi.org/10.1161/circinterventions.123.013697
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Transcatheter versus Surgical Aortic-Valve Replacement in High-Risk Patients2011 · 6,377 citations
  2. 2The STS-ACC Transcatheter Valve Therapy National Registry2013 · 228 citations
  3. 3Updated standardized endpoint definitions for transcatheter aortic valve implantation: the Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 consensus document (VARC-2)2012 · 3,374 citations
  4. 4Routine cerebral embolic protection in transcatheter aortic valve implantation: rationale and design of the randomised British Heart Foundation PROTECT-TAVI trial2023 · 38 citations
  5. 5Cerebral Embolic Protection and Outcomes of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Results From the Transcatheter Valve Therapy Registry2021 · 105 citations