4.4 Review

Meta-Analysis of the Prognostic Impact of Stroke Volume, Gradient, and Ejection Fraction After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY
Volume 116, Issue 6, Pages 989-994

Publisher

EXCERPTA MEDICA INC-ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2015.06.027

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The prognostic implications of several baseline preprocedural variables in patients with severe native valve aortic stenosis (AS) undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) are unclear. The goal of this study was to determine the impact of reduced stroke volume index (SVI), low gradient (LG), and reduced ejection fraction (EF) on all-cause mortality. We searched MEDLINE, CENTRAL, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Scopus through October 13, 2014. We evaluated the association between low SVI (<35 ml/m(2)), LG (<40 min Hg), and low EF (<50% and <30%) on 1-year all-cause mortality. We pooled results across studies using the random-effects model. We included 16 studies at moderate risk of bias enrolling 7,673 patients with severe AS who underwent TAVI. Low EF was associated with increased 1-year mortality after TAVI compared to preserved EF (for EF <30%, hazard ratio [HR] 1.60, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.19 to 2.16, I-2 = 32%; and for EF <50%, HR 1.52, 95% CI 1.31 to 1.76, I-2 = 17%). LG was associated with increased mortality after TAVI compared to high mean gradient (>= 40 mm Hg; HR 1.60, 95% CI 1.30 to 1.97, I-2 = 36%). Low SVI was associated with increased mortality after TAVI compared to normal SVI (HR 1.59, 95% CI 1.23 to 2.05, I-2 = 27%). In conclusion, low SVI, LG, and low EF are each associated with higher mortality after TAVI. These findings highlight the importance of including these variables into TAVI risk algorithms and will better inform shared decision-making before TAVI. (C) 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available