International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature · 2024
Ten-year outcomes after transcatheter or surgical aortic valve replacement in low-risk patients: The OBSERVANT study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Biancari Fausto, D'Errigo Paola, Barbanti Marco, Badoni Gabriella, Tamburino Corrado, Polvani Gianluca, Costa Giuliano, Baglio Giovanni, Rosato Stefano
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The evidence of the long-term advantages of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) over surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for aortic stenosis (AS) remains scarce.
METHODS: Patients with EuroSCORE II < 4 % who underwent TAVR or SAVR for AS from the prospective observational OBSERVANT study were included in this analysis. Ten-year survival was the primary outcome of this analysis. Secondary outcome was repeat procedure on the aortic valve prosthesis.
RESULTS: Propensity score matching resulted in 355 matched pairs of patients who underwent TAVR or SAVR. The mean age of SAVR patients was 80.0 ± 5.1 years and that of TAVR patients 80.1 ± 6.4 years (p = 0.81) and the mean EuroSCORE II was 2.5 ± 0.8 % and 2.6 ± 0.8 % (p = 0.60), respectively. Thirty-day mortality was 2.8 % after SAVR and 2.5 % after TAVR (p = 0.82). At 10-year, survival was 37.0 % (95 %CI 32.2-42.5 %) after SAVR and 18.2 % (95 %CI 14.5-22.8 %) after TAVR (Log-rank test, p < 0.001; HR 1.70, 95 %CI 1.42-2.03). Difference in terms of survival between the propensity matched cohorts became significant 3 years after the procedures. Ten-year cumulative incidences of repeat aortic valve procedure were 2.6 % (95 %CI 1.4-5.0 %) after SAVR and 1.1 % (95 %CI 0.4-3.0 %) after TAVR (p = 0.153; SHR 0.43, 95 %CI 0.13-1.41).
CONCLUSIONS: The results of this prospective observational, non-randomized study showed that 10-year survival of low-risk patients who underwent TAVR with early generation prosthesis devices was lower than SAVR.
METHODS: Patients with EuroSCORE II < 4 % who underwent TAVR or SAVR for AS from the prospective observational OBSERVANT study were included in this analysis. Ten-year survival was the primary outcome of this analysis. Secondary outcome was repeat procedure on the aortic valve prosthesis.
RESULTS: Propensity score matching resulted in 355 matched pairs of patients who underwent TAVR or SAVR. The mean age of SAVR patients was 80.0 ± 5.1 years and that of TAVR patients 80.1 ± 6.4 years (p = 0.81) and the mean EuroSCORE II was 2.5 ± 0.8 % and 2.6 ± 0.8 % (p = 0.60), respectively. Thirty-day mortality was 2.8 % after SAVR and 2.5 % after TAVR (p = 0.82). At 10-year, survival was 37.0 % (95 %CI 32.2-42.5 %) after SAVR and 18.2 % (95 %CI 14.5-22.8 %) after TAVR (Log-rank test, p < 0.001; HR 1.70, 95 %CI 1.42-2.03). Difference in terms of survival between the propensity matched cohorts became significant 3 years after the procedures. Ten-year cumulative incidences of repeat aortic valve procedure were 2.6 % (95 %CI 1.4-5.0 %) after SAVR and 1.1 % (95 %CI 0.4-3.0 %) after TAVR (p = 0.153; SHR 0.43, 95 %CI 0.13-1.41).
CONCLUSIONS: The results of this prospective observational, non-randomized study showed that 10-year survival of low-risk patients who underwent TAVR with early generation prosthesis devices was lower than SAVR.