CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

经导管主动脉瓣置换

科研文章

荐读文献

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement vs Surgical Replacement in Patients With Pure Aortic Insufficiency Cardiac Structural Changes After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Studies Health Status after Transcatheter vs. Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Low-Risk Patients with Aortic Stenosis Discrepancies in Measurement of the Thoracic Aorta: JACC Review Topic of the Week Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement During Pregnancy From organic and inorganic phosphates to valvular and vascular calcifications Incidence, predictors, and outcomes associated with acute kidney injury in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement: from the BRAVO-3 randomized trial Feasibility of Coronary Access and Aortic Valve Reintervention in Low-Risk TAVR Patients Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Low-Risk Patients With Symptomatic Severe Bicuspid Aortic Valve Stenosis Suture- or Plug-Based Large-Bore Arteriotomy Closure: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

Clinical TrialSeptember 2019

JOURNAL:J Am Coll Cardiol. Article Link

Health Status after Transcatheter vs. Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Low-Risk Patients with Aortic Stenosis

SJ Baron, EA Magnuson, the PARTNER 3 Investigators. Keywords: low surgical risk; quality of life

ABSTRACT


BACKGROUND - In patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) at low surgical risk, treatment with transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) results in lower rates of death, stroke, and re-hospitalization at 1 year compared with surgical aortic valve replacement; however, the effect of treatment strategy on health status is unknown.

OBJECTIVES - This study sought to compare health status outcomes of TAVR vs. surgery in low-risk patients with severe AS.

METHODS - Between 3/2016 and 10/2017, 1000 low-risk AS patients were randomized to transfemoral TAVR using a balloon-expandable valve or surgery in the PARTNER 3 Trial. Health status was assessed at baseline, 1, 6 and 12 months using the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ), SF-36 and EQ-5D. The primary endpoint was change in KCCQ-Overall Summary (KCCQ-OS) score over time. Longitudinal growth curve modeling was used to compare changes in health status between treatment groups over time.

RESULTS - At 1 month, TAVR was associated with better health status than surgery (mean difference in KCCQ-OS 16.0 points; p<0.001). At 6 and 12 months, health status remained better with TAVR, although the effect was reduced (mean difference in KCCQ-OS 2.6 and 1.8 points respectively; p<0.04 for both). The proportion of patients with an excellent outcome (alive with KCCQ-OS 75 and no significant decline from baseline) was greater with TAVR than surgery at 6 months (90.3% vs. 85.3%; p=0.03) and 12 months (87.3% vs. 82.8%; p=0.07).

CONCLUSIONS - Among low-risk patients with severe AS, TAVR was associated with meaningful early and late health status benefits compared with surgery.