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

Acute Aortic Syndrome Revisited: JACC State-of-the-Art Review Guideline Update on Indications for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Based on the 2020 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Guidelines for Management of Valvular Heart Disease Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Represents an Anti-Inflammatory Therapy Via Reduction of Shear Stress–Induced, Piezo-1–Mediated Monocyte Activation Evolving concepts in the management of antithrombotic therapy in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation 2-Year Outcomes After Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Low-Risk Patients Edoxaban versus Dual Antiplatelet Therapy for Leaflet Thrombosis and Cerebral Thromboembolism after TAVR: The ADAPT-TAVR Randomized Clinical Trial Minimum Core Data Elements for Evaluation of TAVR: A Scientific Statement by PASSION CV, HVC, and TVT Registry Left ventricular remodelling and changes in functional measurements in patients undergoing transcatheter vs surgical aortic valve replacement: a head-to-head comparison

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.