EurekaMag.com logo
+ Site Statistics
References:
53,869,633
Abstracts:
29,686,251
+ Search Articles
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
EurekaMag Most Shared ContentMost Shared
EurekaMag PDF Full Text ContentPDF Full Text
+ PDF Full Text
Request PDF Full TextRequest PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on FacebookFollow on Facebook
Follow on TwitterFollow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedInFollow on LinkedIn

+ Translate

Transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in patients at low surgical risk: A meta-analysis of randomized trials and propensity score matched observational studies



Transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in patients at low surgical risk: A meta-analysis of randomized trials and propensity score matched observational studies



Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions



Although transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is officially indicated for high risk aortic stenosis (AS) patients, the procedure is increasingly being performed in patients who are not at high surgical risk, including a substantial number of low risk patients. However, data on the benefit of TAVR in this patient population is limited. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies with propensity score matching (PSM) of TAVR versus surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients who are at low surgical risk. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. The secondary outcomes included stroke, myocardial infarction, bleeding, and various procedural complications. Six studies (2 RCTs and 4 PSM studies) totaling 3,484 patients were included. Follow-up ranged from 3 months to 3 years (median 2 years). The short-term mortality was similar with either TAVR or SAVR (2.2% for TAVR and 2.6% for SAVR, RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.56-1.41, Pā€‰=ā€‰0.62), however, TAVR was associated with increased risk for intermediate-term mortality (17.2% for TAVR and 12.7% for SAVR, RR 1.45, 95% CI 1.11-1.89, Pā€‰=ā€‰0.006). In terms of periprocedural complications, TAVR was associated with reduced risk for bleeding and renal failure and an increase in vascular complications and Pacemaker implantation. In patients who are at low surgical risk, TAVR seems to be associated with increased mortality risk. Until more data in this population is available, SAVR should remain the treatment of choice for these patients.

(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 065633106

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 29388308

DOI: 10.1002/ccd.27518



Related references

Transcatheter versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in High-risk Patients: A propensity-score matched analysis. Heart, Lung & Circulation 25(7): 661-667, 2016

Long-term survival after transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis: A meta-analysis of observational comparative studies with a propensity-score analysis. Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions, 2018

Transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in low to intermediate risk patients: A meta-analysis of randomized and observational studies. International Journal of Cardiology 228(): 723-728, 2016

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation versus surgical aortic valve replacement: a propensity score analysis in patients at high surgical risk. Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery 143(1): 64-71, 2012

Worse survival after transcatheter aortic valve implantation than surgical aortic valve replacement: A meta-analysis of observational studies with a propensity-score analysis. International Journal of Cardiology 220(): 320-327, 2016

Transcatheter vs surgical aortic valve replacement in intermediate-surgical-risk patients with aortic stenosis: a propensity score-matched case-control study. American Heart Journal 164(6): 910-917, 2013

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement versus surgical valve replacement in intermediate-risk patients: a propensity score analysis. Lancet 387(10034): 2218-2225, 2016

Sutureless aortic valve replacement versus transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a meta-analysis of comparative matched studies using propensity score matching. Interactive Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery, 2017

Midterm outcome of transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in low to intermediate risk patients: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Journal of Cardiology 71(6): 534-539, 2018

Midterm outcome of transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in low to intermediate risk patients: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Journal of Cardiology 71(6): 534-539, 2018

TCT-440 Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients with Prior Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: Trends in Utilization and a Propensity-Score Matched Analysis of In-hospital Outcomes. Journal of the American College of Cardiology 70(18): B180-B181, 2017

Transcatheter or surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with advanced kidney disease: A propensity score-matched analysis. Clinical Cardiology, 2017

Costs and in-hospital outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve implantation versus surgical aortic valve replacement in commercial cases using a propensity score matched model. American Journal of Cardiology 115(10): 1443-1447, 2015

In-hospital mortality in propensity-score matched low-risk patients undergoing routine isolated surgical or transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement in 2014 in Germany. Clinical Research in Cardiology 106(8): 610-617, 2017

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation versus surgical aortic valve replacement: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. International Journal of Cardiology 224(): 382-387, 2016