Advertisement
Heart, Lung and Circulation

Outcomes of Aortic Valve Replacement According to Surgical Approach in Intermediate and Low Risk Patients: A Propensity Score Analysis

Published:September 06, 2017DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hlc.2017.08.010

      Background

      Previous trials have shown that, among high-risk patients with aortic stenosis, survival rates are similar for transcatheter aortic-valve implantation (TAVI) and surgical aortic valve replacement. The study aimed to compare the outcomes of aortic valve replacement according to the adopted surgical approach in intermediate and low risk patients.

      Methods

      This is a retrospective, observational, cohort study of prospectively collected data from 421 patients undergoing isolated aortic valve replacement between 2011 and 2015. A multinomial logit propensity score model based on preoperative risk factors was used to match patients 1:1:1 between conventional replacement (CAVR), minimally invasive (MIAVR) and TAVI groups, resulting in 50 matched three cohorts.

      Results

      After multinomial logit propensity score, the three groups were comparable in terms of preoperative characteristics. Mean age and Logistic EuroSCORE I of CAVR, MIAVR and TAVI groups were (84.2 ± 5.1 vs. 82.3 ± 4.8 vs. 85.6 ± 4.9 years; p = 0.002) and (11.4 ± 3.6% vs. 8.3 ± 3.4% vs. 15.8 ± 5.4%; p < 0.001) respectively. Overall mortality rates were similar for the three patient cohorts at one year. There were no significant differences related to stroke to 30 days. In the TAVI cohort, pacemaker implantation for new-onset total atrioventricular block became necessary in 30% of patients (p < 0.001) and 16% of patients had some degree of paravalvular aortic regurgitation, which was more than mild (p < 0.001). Total length of stay was shorter in the TAVI group when compared with surgical groups (11.5 ± 5.3 vs. 10.1 ± 6.9 vs 8.5 ± 3.7 days; p = 0.023). After discharge, the survival rate follow-up (average follow up: 46.7 months) was 70%, 84% and 72% for three cohorts (log Rank x2 = 2.40, p = 0.3).

      Conclusions

      In our experience, the three aortic valve replacement approaches offer very good results. Differences in the rate of complications were found between groups. Depending on patient’s characteristics the Heart-Team group must offer the best surgical approach for each patient.

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Heart, Lung and Circulation
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Cosgrove D.M.
        • Sabik J.F.
        Minimally invasive approach for aortic valve operations.
        Ann Thorac Surg. 1996; 62: 596-597
        • Schmitto J.D.
        • Mokashi S.A.
        • Cohn L.H.
        Minimally-invasive valve surgery.
        J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010; 56: 455-462
        • Gulbins H.
        • Pritisanac A.
        • Hannekum A.
        Minimally invasive heart valve surgery: already established in clinical routine?.
        Expert Rev Cardiovasc Ther. 2004; 2: 837-843
        • Caffarelli A.D.
        • Robbins R.C.
        Will minimally invasive valve replacement ever really be important.
        Curr Opin Cardiol. 2004; 19: 123-127
        • Moustafa M.A.
        • Abdelsamad A.A.
        • Zakaria G.
        • Omarah M.M.
        Minimal vs median sternotomy for aortic valve replacement.
        Asian Cardiovasc Thorac Ann. 2007; 15: 472-475
        • De Smet J.M.
        • Rondelet B.
        • Jansens J.L.
        • Antoine M.
        • De Canniere D.
        • Le Clerc J.L.
        Assessment based on EuroSCORE of ministernotomy for aortic valve replacement.
        Asian Cardiovasc Thorac Ann. 2004; 12: 53-57
        • Azpitarte J.
        Valvulopatías en el anciano: ¿cuándo operar.
        Rev Esp Cardiol. 1998; 51: 3-9
        • Morís C.
        • Avanzas P.
        TAVI: una revolución en cardiología.
        Rev Esp Cardiol. 2015; 15: 1-2
        • Varadarajan P.
        • Kapoor N.
        • Bansal R.C.
        • Pai R.G.
        Survival in elderly patients with severe aortic stenosis is dramatically improved by aortic valve replacement: Results from a cohort of 277 patients aged > or =80 years.
        Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2006; 30: 722-727
        • Rosenbaum P.R.
        • Rubin D.B.
        Constructing a control group using multivariate matched sampling methods that incorporate the propensity score.
        Am Stat. 1985; 39: 33-38
        • Imbens G.W.
        The role of the propensity score in estimating dose response functions.
        Biometrika. 2000; 87: 706-710
        • Calvo D.
        • Lozano I.
        • Llosa J.C.
        • Lee D.-H.
        • Martín M.
        • Avanzas P.
        • et al.
        Cirugía de recambio valvular por estenosis aórtica severa en mayores de 80 años. Experiencia de un centro en una serie de pacientes consecutivos.
        Rev Esp Cardiol. 2007; 60: 720-726
        • Lucas G.
        • Tribouilloy C.
        Epidemiology and etiology of acquired heart valve diseases in adults.
        Rev Prat. 2000; 50: 1642-1645
        • Gundry S.R.
        • Shattuck O.H.
        • Razzouk A.J.
        • del Rio M.J.
        • Sardari F.F.
        • Bailey L.L.
        Facile Minimally Invasive Cardiac Surgery via Ministernotomy.
        Ann Thorac Surg. 1998; 65: 1100-1104
        • Lopez-Otero D.
        • Teles R.
        • Gomez-Hospital J.A.
        • Balestrini C.S.
        • Romaguera R.
        • Saaibi-Solano J.F.
        • et al.
        Transcatheter aortic valve implantation: safety and effectiveness of the treatment of degenerated aortic homograft.
        Rev Esp Cardiol. 2012; 65: 350-355
        • Avanzas P.
        • Munoz-Garcia A.J.
        • Segura J.
        • Pan M.
        • Alonso-Briales J.H.
        • Lozano I.
        • et al.
        Percutaneous implantation of the CoreValve self-expanding aortic valve prosthesis in patients with severe aortic stenosis: early experience in Spain.
        Rev Esp Cardiol. 2010; 63: 141-148
        • Cohn L.H.
        • Adams D.H.
        • Couper G.S.
        • Bichell D.P.
        • Rosborough D.M.
        • Sears S.P.
        • et al.
        Minimally invasive cardiac valve surgery improves patient satisfaction while reducing costs of cardiac valve replacement and repair.
        Ann Surg. 1997; 226: 421-428
        • Bonacchi M.
        • Prifti E.
        • Giunti G.
        • Frati G.
        • Sani G.
        Does ministernotomy improve postoperative outcome in aortic valve operation? A prospective randomized study.
        Ann Thorac Surg. 2002; 73 (discussion 5-6): 460-465
        • Farhat F.
        • Metton O.
        • Jegaden O.
        Benefits and complications of total sternotomy and ministernotomy in cardiac surgery.
        Surg Technol Int. 2004; 13: 199-205
        • Schmitto J.D.
        • Mohr F.W.
        • Cohn L.H.
        Minimally invasive aortic valve replacement: how does this perform in high-risk patients?.
        Curr Opin Cardiol. 2011; 26: 118-122
        • Mack M.J.
        • Leon M.B.
        • Smith C.R.
        • Miller D.C.
        • Moses J.W.
        • Tuzcu E.M.
        • et al.
        5-year outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement or surgical aortic valve replacement for high surgical risk patients with aortic stenosis (PARTNER 1): a randomised controlled trial.
        Lancet. 2015; 385: 2477-2484
        • Kappetein A.P.
        PARTNERs in the future of surgical aortic valve replacement.
        Lancet. 2015; 385: 2439-2441
        • Cao C.
        • Ang S.C.
        • Indraratna P.
        • Manganas C.
        • Bannon P.
        • Black D.
        • et al.
        Systematic review and meta-analysis of transcatheter aortic valve implantation versus surgical aortic valve replacement for severe aortic stenosis.
        Ann Cardiothorac Surg. 2013; 2: 10-23
        • Grossi E.A.
        • Galloway A.C.
        • Ribakove G.H.
        • Buttenheim P.M.
        • Esposito R.
        • Baumann F.G.
        • et al.
        Minimally invasive port access surgery reduces operative morbidity for valve replacement in the elderly.
        Heart Surg Forum. 1999; 2: 212-215
        • Bagur R.
        • Rodés-Cabau J.
        • Gurvitch R.
        • Dumont É.
        • Velianou J.L.
        • Manazzoni J.
        • et al.
        Need for Permanent Pacemaker as a Complication of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation and Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Elderly Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis and Similar Baseline Electrocardiographic Findings.
        JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2012; 5: 540-551
        • Neragi-Miandoab S.
        • Michler R.E.
        A Review of Most Relevant Complications of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation.
        ISRN Cardiol. 2013; 2013: 956252
        • Stratiev V.
        • Guyon P.
        • Teiger E.
        • Collet J.P.
        Reducing the risk of vascular complications during percutaneous aortic valve replacement.
        Ann Cardiol Angeiol. 2012; 61: 281-286
        • Takagi K.
        • Latib A.
        • Al-Lamee R.
        • Mussardo M.
        • Montorfano M.
        • Maisano F.
        • et al.
        Predictors of moderate-to-severe paravalvular aortic regurgitation immediately after CoreValve implantation and the impact of postdilatation.
        Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2011; 78: 432-443
        • Detaint D.
        • Lepage L.
        • Himbert D.
        • Brochet E.
        • Messika-Zeitoun D.
        • Iung B.
        • et al.
        Determinants of ́significant paravalvular regurgitation after transcatheter aortic valve: implantation impact of device and annulus discongruence.
        Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2009; 2: 821-827
        • Abdel-Wahab M.
        • Zahn R.
        • Horack M.
        • Gerckens U.
        • Schuler G.
        • Sievert H.
        • et al.
        Aortic regurgitation after transcatheter aortic valve implantation: incidence and early outcome. Results from the German transcatheter aortic valve interventions registry.
        Heart. 2011; 97: 899-906