CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Abstract

Recommended Article

Health Status after Transcatheter vs. Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Low-Risk Patients with Aortic Stenosis Coronary Access After TAVR Risk of Coronary Obstruction and Feasibility of Coronary Access After Repeat Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement With the Self-Expanding Evolut Valve: A Computed Tomography Simulation Study Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Severe Aortic Valve Stenosis: 1-Year Results From the All-Comers NOTION Randomized Clinical Trial Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Replacement with a Self-Expanding Valve in Low-Risk Patients Informed Shared Decisions for Patients with Aortic Stenosis Transcatheter and surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with bicuspid aortic valve Coronary Protection to Prevent Coronary Obstruction During TAVR: A Multicenter International Registry

Clinical Trial2021 Mar, 77 (9) 1149–1161

JOURNAL:J Am Coll Cardiol. Article Link

Outcomes 2 Years After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients at Low Surgical Risk

MB Leon , MJ Mack, and the PARTNER 3 Investigators. Keywords: TAVR vs. SAVR; low surgical risk patients; 2-year follow-up

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND - In low surgical risk patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis, the PARTNER 3 (Safety and Effectiveness of the SAPIEN 3 Transcatheter Heart Valve in Low Risk Patients With Aortic Stenosis) trial demonstrated superiority of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) versus surgery for the primary endpoint of death, stroke, or re-hospitalization at 1 year.

 

OBJECTIVES - This study determined both clinical and echocardiographic outcomes between 1 and 2 years in the PARTNER 3 trial.

 

METHODS - This study randomly assigned 1,000 patients (1:1) to transfemoral TAVR with the SAPIEN 3 valve versus surgery (mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons score: 1.9%; mean age: 73 years) with clinical and echocardiography follow-up at 30 days and at 1 and 2 years. This study assessed 2-year rates of the primary endpoint and several secondary endpoints (clinical, echocardiography, and quality-of-life measures) in this as-treated analysis.

 

RESULTS - Primary endpoint follow-up at 2 years was available in 96.5% of patients. The 2-year primary endpoint was significantly reduced after TAVR versus surgery (11.5% vs. 17.4%; hazard ratio: 0.63; 95% confidence interval: 0.45 to 0.88; p = 0.007). Differences in death and stroke favoring TAVR at 1 year were not statistically significant at 2 years (death: TAVR 2.4% vs. surgery 3.2%; p = 0.47; stroke: TAVR 2.4% vs. surgery 3.6%; p = 0.28). Valve thrombosis at 2 years was increased after TAVR (2.6%; 13 events) compared with surgery (0.7%; 3 events; p = 0.02). Disease-specific health status continued to be better after TAVR versus surgery through 2 years. Echocardiographic findings, including hemodynamic valve deterioration and bioprosthetic valve failure, were similar for TAVR and surgery at 2 years.

 

CONCLUSIONS - At 2 years, the primary endpoint remained significantly lower with TAVR versus surgery, but initial differences in death and stroke favoring TAVR were diminished and patients who underwent TAVR had increased valve thrombosis. (Safety and Effectiveness of the SAPIEN 3 Transcatheter Heart Valve in Low Risk Patients With Aortic Stenosis [PARTNER 3]; NCT02675114)