CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

科研文章

荐读文献

Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Replacement with a Self-Expanding Valve in Low-Risk Patients Edoxaban versus Vitamin K Antagonist for Atrial Fibrillation after TAVR Raising the Evidentiary Bar for Guideline Recommendations for TAVR: JACC Review Topic of the Week Predictors of high residual gradient after transcatheter aortic valve replacement in bicuspid aortic valve stenosis Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Severe Aortic Valve Stenosis: 1-Year Results From the All-Comers NOTION Randomized Clinical Trial Long-Term Durability of Transcatheter Heart Valves: Insights From Bench Testing to 25 Years Timing of intervention in asymptomatic patients with valvular heart disease Online Quantitative Aortographic Assessment of Aortic Regurgitation After TAVR: Results of the OVAL Study Temporal Trends in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in France: FRANCE 2 to FRANCE TAVI A prospective, randomised trial of transapical transcatheter aortic valve implantation vs. surgical aortic valve replacement in operable elderly patients with aortic stenosis: the STACCATO trial

Clinical TrialJanuary 29, 2020

JOURNAL:N Engl J Med. Article Link

Five-Year Outcomes of Transcatheter or Surgical Aortic-Valve Replacement

RR Makkar, VH Thourani, the PARTNER 2 Investigators. Keywords: intermediate-risk patients; TAVR; SAVR

ABSTRACT


BACKGROUND - There are scant data on long-term clinical outcomes and bioprosthetic-valve function after transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR) as compared with surgical aortic-valve replacement in patients with severe aortic stenosis and intermediate surgical risk.

 

METHODS - We enrolled 2032 intermediate-risk patients with severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis at 57 centers. Patients were stratified according to intended transfemoral or transthoracic access (76.3% and 23.7%, respectively) and were randomly assigned to undergo either TAVR or surgical replacement. Clinical, echocardiographic, and health-status outcomes were followed for 5 years. The primary end point was death from any cause or disabling stroke.

 

RESULTS - At 5 years, there was no significant difference in the incidence of death from any cause or disabling stroke between the TAVR group and the surgery group (47.9% and 43.4%, respectively; hazard ratio, 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.95 to 1.25; P=0.21). Results were similar for the transfemoral-access cohort (44.5% and 42.0%, respectively; hazard ratio, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.87 to 1.20), but the incidence of death or disabling stroke was higher after TAVR than after surgery in the transthoracic-access cohort (59.3% vs. 48.3%; hazard ratio, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.71). At 5 years, more patients in the TAVR group than in the surgery group had at least mild paravalvular aortic regurgitation (33.3% vs. 6.3%). Repeat hospitalizations were more frequent after TAVR than after surgery (33.3% vs. 25.2%), as were aortic-valve reinterventions (3.2% vs. 0.8%). Improvement in health status at 5 years was similar for TAVR and surgery.

 

CONCLUSIONS - Among patients with aortic stenosis who were at intermediate surgical risk, there was no significant difference in the incidence of death or disabling stroke at 5 years after TAVR as compared with surgical aortic-valve replacement. (Funded by Edwards Lifesciences; PARTNER 2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01314313. )