CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Predictors of high residual gradient after transcatheter aortic valve replacement in bicuspid aortic valve stenosis The Use of Sex-Specific Factors in the Assessment of Women’s Cardiovascular Risk Relationship Between Hospital Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement Volume and Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Outcomes Intravascular Ultrasound Guidance Is Associated With Better Outcome in Patients Undergoing Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Stenting Compared With Angiography Guidance Alone 2019 Guidelines on Diabetes, Pre-Diabetes and Cardiovascular Diseases developed in collaboration with the EASD ESC Clinical Practice Guidelines Regional Heterogeneity in the Coronary Vascular Response in Women With Chest Pain and Nonobstructive Coronary Artery Disease Aortic Valve Stenosis Treatment Disparities in the Underserved JACC Council Perspectives Association of Smoking Status With Long‐Term Mortality and Health Status After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Insights From the Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Valve Therapy Registry Third-Generation Balloon and Self-Expandable Valves for Aortic Stenosis in Large and Extra-Large Aortic Annuli From the TAVR-LARGE Registry Haemodynamic-guided management of heart failure (GUIDE-HF): a randomised controlled trial

Original ResearchVolume 13, Issue 8, April 2020

JOURNAL:JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions Article Link

Incidence and Outcomes of Acute Coronary Syndrome After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

AMentias, MY Desai, M Saad et al. Keywords: ACS; post TAVR; PCI

ABSTRACT


OBJECTIVES - This study sought to address a knowledge gap by examining the incidence, timing, and predictors of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in Medicare beneficiaries.

 

BACKGROUND - Evidence about incidence and outcomes of ACS after TAVR is scarce.

 

METHODS - We identified medicare patients who underwent tavr from 2012 to 2017 and were admitted with ACS during follow-up. We compared outcomes based on the type of ACS: ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), non-STEMI (NSTEMI), and unstable angina. In patients with nonST-segment elevation ACS, we compared outcomes based on the treatment strategy (invasive vs. conservative) using inverse probability weighting analysis.

 

RESULTS - Out of 142,845 patients with TAVR, 6,741 patients (4.7%) were admitted with ACS after a median time of 297 days (interquartile range: 85 to 662 days), with 48% of admissions occurring within 6 months. The most common presentation was NSTEMI. Predictors of ACS were history of coronary artery disease, prior revascularization, diabetes, valve-in-TAVR, and acute kidney injury. STEMI was associated with higher 30-day and 1-year mortality compared with NSTEMI (31.4% vs. 15.5% and 51.2% vs. 41.3%, respectively; p < 0.01). Overall, 30.3% of patients with nonST-segment elevation ACS were treated with invasive approach. On inverse probability weighting analysis, invasive approach was associated with lower adjusted long-term mortality (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.69; 95% confidence interval: 0.66 to 0.73; p < 0.01) and higher risk of repeat revascularization (adjusted hazard ratio: 1.29; 95% confidence interval: 1.16 to 1.43; p < 0.001).

 

CONCLUSIONS - After TAVR, ACS is infrequent (<5%), and the most common presentation is NSTEMI. Occurrence of STEMI after TAVR is associated with a high mortality with nearly one-third of patients dying within 30 days. Optimization of care is needed for post-TAVR ACS patients and if feasible, invasive approach should be considered in these high-risk patients.