CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing: What Is its Value? Large-Bore Radial Access for Complex PCI: A Flash of COLOR With Some Shades of Grey Selection of stenting approach for coronary bifurcation lesions Effects of clopidogrel vs. prasugrel vs. ticagrelor on endothelial function, inflammatory parameters, and platelet function in patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing coronary artery stenting: a randomized, blinded, parallel study Development and validation of a simple risk score to predict 30-day readmission after percutaneous coronary intervention in a cohort of medicare patients Hs-cTroponins for the prediction of recurrent cardiovascular events in patients with established CHD - A comparative analysis from the KAROLA study Systems of Care for ST-Segment–Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Policy Statement From the American Heart Association Refractory Angina: From Pathophysiology to New Therapeutic Nonpharmacological Technologies Systematic Review for the 2018 AHA/ACC/AACVPR/AAPA/ABC/ACPM/ADA/AGS/APhA/ASPC/NLA/PCNA Guideline on the Management of Blood Cholesterol: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines Novel functions of macrophages in the heart: insights into electrical conduction, stress, and diastolic dysfunction

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.