CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Abstract

Recommended Article

Contemporary real-world outcomes of surgical aortic valve replacement in 141,905 low-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk patients Gender Differences in Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Decline in Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction During Follow-Up in Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis Timing of intervention in asymptomatic patients with valvular heart disease Five-Year Outcomes of Transcatheter or Surgical Aortic-Valve Replacement Impact of Severe Sarcopenia on Rehospitalization and Survival One Year After a TAVR Procedure in Patients Aged 75 and Older Outcomes of procedural complications in transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement 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

Original ResearchVolume 12, Issue 24, December 2019

JOURNAL:JACC Cardiovasc Interv. Article Link

Association Between Diastolic Dysfunction and Health Status Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

AO Malik, M Omer, MC Pflederer et al. Keywords: health status; left ventricular diastolic dysfunction; TAVR

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES - The aim of this study was to assess the association of baseline left ventricular diastolic dysfunction (LVDD) with health status outcomes of patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).

 

BACKGROUND - Although LVDD in patients with aortic stenosis is associated with higher mortality after TAVR, it is unknown if it is also associated with health status recovery.

 

METHODS - In a cohort of 304 patients with interpretable echocardiograms, undergoing TAVR, LVDD was categorized at baseline as absent (grade 0), mild (grade 1), moderate (grade 2), or severe (grade 3). Disease-specific health status was assessed using the 12-item Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire overall summary score (KCCQ-OS) at baseline and at 1-month and 12-month follow-up. Association of baseline LVDD with health status at baseline and follow-up after TAVR was assessed using a linear trend test, and association with health status recovery (change in KCCQ-OS) was examined using a linear mixed model adjusting for baseline KCCQ-OS.

 

RESULTS - Twenty-four (7.9%), 54 (17.8%), 186 (61.2%), and 40 (13.2%) patients had LVDD grades of 0, 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Baseline KCCQ-OS was 61.3 ± 22.7, 51.0 ± 26.1, 44.7 ± 25.7, and 44.4 ± 21.9 (p = 0.004) in patients with LVDD grades of 0, 1,2 and 3. At 1 and 12 months after TAVR, LVDD was not associated with KCCQ-OS. Recovery in KCCQ-OS after TAVR was substantial and similar in patients across all severities of LVDD.

 

CONCLUSIONS - Although LVDD is associated with health status prior to TAVR, patients across all severities of LVDD have similar recovery in health status after TAVR.