4.7 Article

Eight-year outcomes for patients with aortic valve stenosis at low surgical risk randomized to transcatheter vs. surgical aortic valve replacement

Journal

EUROPEAN HEART JOURNAL
Volume 42, Issue 30, Pages 2912-2919

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehab375

Keywords

Surgical aortic valve replacement; Transcatheter aortic valve implantation; Bioprosthetic aortic valve durability; Mortality; Stroke

Funding

  1. Danish Heart Foundation [09-10-AR76-A2733-25400, 12-04-R90-A3879-22733, 13-04-R94-A4473-22762]
  2. Medtronic

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In a study comparing clinical outcomes and valve durability after 8 years of follow-up in patients with symptomatic severe aortic valve stenosis at low surgical risk treated with either transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR), no significant differences were found in the risk for all-cause mortality, stroke, or myocardial infarction, as well as the risk of bioprosthetic valve failure between the two groups.
Aims The aims of the study were to compare clinical outcomes and valve durability after 8 years of follow-up in patients with symptomatic severe aortic valve stenosis at low surgical risk treated with either transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). Methods and results In the NOTION trial, patients with symptomatic severe aortic valve stenosis were randomized to TAVI or SAVR. Clinical status, echocardiography, structural valve deterioration, and failure were assessed using standardized definitions. In total, 280 patients were randomized to TAVI (n = 145) or SAVR (n = 135). Baseline characteristics were similar, including mean age of 79.1 +/- 4.8 years and a mean STS score of 3.0 +/- 1.7%. At 8-year follow-up, the estimated risk of the composite outcome of all-cause mortality, stroke, or myocardial infarction was 54.5% after TAVI and 54.8% after SAVR (P = 0.94). The estimated risks for all-cause mortality (51.8% vs. 52.6%; P = 0.90), stroke (8.3% vs. 9.1%; P = 0.90), or myocardial infarction (6.2% vs. 3.8%; P = 0.33) were similar after TAVI and SAVR. The risk of structural valve deterioration was lower after TAVI than after SAVR (13.9% vs. 28.3%; P = 0.0017), whereas the risk of bioprosthetic valve failure was similar (8.7% vs. 10.5%; P = 0.61). Conclusions In patients with severe aortic valve stenosis at low surgical risk randomized to TAVI or SAVR, there were no significant differences in the risk for all-cause mortality, stroke, or myocardial infarction, as well as the risk of bioprosthetic valve failure after 8 years of follow-up.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available