4.6 Article

Outcomes Following Urgent/Emergent Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Insights From the STS/ACC TVT Registry

Journal

JACC-CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS
Volume 11, Issue 12, Pages 1175-1185

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2018.03.002

Keywords

aortic stenosis; cardiogenic shock; heart failure; mortality; transcatheter aortic valve implantation; transcatheter aortic valve replacement

Funding

  1. Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology's TVT Registry
  2. American College of Cardiology
  3. Society of Thoracic Surgeons
  4. Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute
  5. Abbott Vascular
  6. Boston Scientific
  7. Boehringer Ingelheim
  8. Siemens

Ask authors/readers for more resources

OBJECTIVES The authors sought to examine outcomes and identify independent predictors of mortality among patients undergoing urgent/emergent transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). BACKGROUND Data on urgent/emergent TAVR as a rescue therapy for decompensated severe aortic stenosis (AS) are limited. METHODS The Society of Thoracic Surgeons and the American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Valve Therapy (STS/ACC TVT) Registry linked with Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services claims was used to identify patients who underwent urgent/emergent versus elective TAVR between November 2011 and June 2016. Outcomes assessed were device success rate, in-hospital major adverse events, and 30-day and 1-year mortality. Independent predictors of mortality after urgent/emergent TAVR were examined. RESULTS Of 40,042 patients who underwent TAVR, 3,952 (9.9%) were urgent/emergent (median STS PROM score 11.8 [interquartile range: 7.6 to 17.9]). Device success rate was statistically lower, but not clinically different after urgent/emergent versus elective TAVR (92.6% vs. 93.7%; p = 0.007). Rates of major and/or life-threatening bleeding, major vascular complications, myocardial infarction, stroke, new permanent pacemaker placement, conversion to SAVR, and paravalvular regurgitation were similar between the 2 groups. Compared with elective TAVR, patients undergoing urgent/emergent TAVR had higher rates of acute kidney injury and/or new dialysis (8.2% vs. 4.2%; p < 0.001), 30-day mortality (8.7% vs. 4.3%, adjusted hazard ratio: 1.28, 95% confidence interval: 1.10 to 1.48), and 1-year mortality (29.1% vs. 17.5%, adjusted hazard ratio: 1.20, 95% confidence interval: 1.10 to 1.31). In patients undergoing urgent/emergent TAVR, non-femoral access and cardiopulmonary bypass were associated with increased risk, whereas use of balloon-expandable valve was associated with decreased risk of 30-day and 1-year mortality. CONCLUSIONS Urgent/emergent TAVR is feasible with acceptable outcomes and may be a reasonable option in a selected group of patients with severe AS. (c) 2018 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available