Transcatheter vs Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Bicuspid Aortic Valves.

BACKGROUND

Recent approval of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in patients at lower risk profiles has resulted in a real-world expansion in patients with bicuspid aortic valves (BAV), otherwise excluded from trials comparing TAVR with surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). This study compared perioperative and longitudinal outcomes between BAV patients undergoing TAVR vs SAVR.

METHODS

Using the United States Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services inpatient claims database, we evaluated all beneficiaries with BAV undergoing isolated SAVR or TAVR (2018-2022). Comorbidities and frailty were accounted for using validated metrics with doubly robust risk adjustment using inverse probability weighting, multilevel regression models, and competing-risk time to event analysis. Subgroup analysis evaluated patients <75 years with low surgical risk (<4%).

RESULTS

The study included 11,289 BAV patients (8123 SAVR and 3166 TAVR). Accounting for age, comorbidities, and frailty, TAVR was associated with lower procedural mortality (odds ratio, 0.40; P < .001) but higher pacemaker (12.4% vs 2.3%; odds ratio, 5.4; P < .001), longitudinal stroke (2.4% vs 1.5%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.35; P < .001), and all-cause mortality (8.8% vs 5.7%; HR, 1.49; P < .001) compared with SAVR. The young low-risk subgroup (5393 SAVR and 1731 TAVR) highlighted similar findings, with TAVR associated with higher longitudinal stroke (2.1% vs 1.7%; HR, 1.22; P = .017) and composite stroke, valve reintervention, or death (8.1% vs 5.9%; HR, 1.37; P < .001) compared with SAVR.

CONCLUSIONS

Among Medicare beneficiaries with BAV, TAVR was associated with lower index in-hospital mortality but also lower 5-year risk-adjusted freedom from longitudinal stroke compared with SAVR, even in the youngest low-risk patients.