Cargando…

Report on outcomes of valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation and redo surgical aortic valve replacement in the Netherlands

OBJECTIVE: We sought to investigate real-world outcomes of patients with degenerated biological aortic valve prostheses who had undergone valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation (ViV-TAVI) or reoperative surgical aortic valve replacement (redo-SAVR) in the Netherlands. METHODS: Patien...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: van Steenbergen, G. J., van Straten, B., Lam, K. Y., van Veghel, D., Dekker, L., Tonino, P. A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Bohn Stafleu van Loghum 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8799804/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34373997
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12471-021-01608-0
_version_ 1784642133080145920
author van Steenbergen, G. J.
van Straten, B.
Lam, K. Y.
van Veghel, D.
Dekker, L.
Tonino, P. A.
author_facet van Steenbergen, G. J.
van Straten, B.
Lam, K. Y.
van Veghel, D.
Dekker, L.
Tonino, P. A.
author_sort van Steenbergen, G. J.
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: We sought to investigate real-world outcomes of patients with degenerated biological aortic valve prostheses who had undergone valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation (ViV-TAVI) or reoperative surgical aortic valve replacement (redo-SAVR) in the Netherlands. METHODS: Patients who had undergone ViV-TAVI or redo-SAVR for a degenerated biological aortic valve prosthesis in the Netherlands between January 2014 and December 2018 were eligible for this retrospective study. Patients with a prior homograft, active endocarditis or mechanical aortic valve prosthesis were excluded. Patients were matched using the propensity score. The primary endpoint was a composite of 30-day all-cause mortality and in-hospital postoperative stroke. Secondary endpoints were all-cause mortality at different time points, in-hospital postoperative stroke, pacemaker implantation and redo procedures within one year. Baseline characteristics and outcome data were collected from the Netherlands Heart Registration. RESULTS: From 16 cardiac centres, 653 patients were included in the study (374 ViV-TAVI and 279 redo-SAVR). European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation I (EuroSCORE I) was higher in ViV-TAVI patients (19.4, interquartile range (IQR) 13.3–27.9 vs 13.8, IQR 8.3–21.9, p < 0.01). After propensity score matching, 165 patients were matched with acceptable covariate balance. In the matched cohorts, the primary endpoint was not significantly different for ViV-TAVI and redo-SAVR patients (odds ratio 1.30, 95% confidence interval 0.57–3.02). Procedural, 30-day and 1‑year all-cause mortality rates, incidence of in-hospital postoperative stroke, pacemaker implantation and redo procedures within one year were also similar between cohorts. CONCLUSION: Patients with degenerated aortic bioprostheses treated with ViV-TAVI or redo-SAVR have similar mortality and morbidity. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version of this article (10.1007/s12471-021-01608-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8799804
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Bohn Stafleu van Loghum
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-87998042022-02-02 Report on outcomes of valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation and redo surgical aortic valve replacement in the Netherlands van Steenbergen, G. J. van Straten, B. Lam, K. Y. van Veghel, D. Dekker, L. Tonino, P. A. Neth Heart J Original Article OBJECTIVE: We sought to investigate real-world outcomes of patients with degenerated biological aortic valve prostheses who had undergone valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation (ViV-TAVI) or reoperative surgical aortic valve replacement (redo-SAVR) in the Netherlands. METHODS: Patients who had undergone ViV-TAVI or redo-SAVR for a degenerated biological aortic valve prosthesis in the Netherlands between January 2014 and December 2018 were eligible for this retrospective study. Patients with a prior homograft, active endocarditis or mechanical aortic valve prosthesis were excluded. Patients were matched using the propensity score. The primary endpoint was a composite of 30-day all-cause mortality and in-hospital postoperative stroke. Secondary endpoints were all-cause mortality at different time points, in-hospital postoperative stroke, pacemaker implantation and redo procedures within one year. Baseline characteristics and outcome data were collected from the Netherlands Heart Registration. RESULTS: From 16 cardiac centres, 653 patients were included in the study (374 ViV-TAVI and 279 redo-SAVR). European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation I (EuroSCORE I) was higher in ViV-TAVI patients (19.4, interquartile range (IQR) 13.3–27.9 vs 13.8, IQR 8.3–21.9, p < 0.01). After propensity score matching, 165 patients were matched with acceptable covariate balance. In the matched cohorts, the primary endpoint was not significantly different for ViV-TAVI and redo-SAVR patients (odds ratio 1.30, 95% confidence interval 0.57–3.02). Procedural, 30-day and 1‑year all-cause mortality rates, incidence of in-hospital postoperative stroke, pacemaker implantation and redo procedures within one year were also similar between cohorts. CONCLUSION: Patients with degenerated aortic bioprostheses treated with ViV-TAVI or redo-SAVR have similar mortality and morbidity. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version of this article (10.1007/s12471-021-01608-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Bohn Stafleu van Loghum 2021-08-09 2022-02 /pmc/articles/PMC8799804/ /pubmed/34373997 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12471-021-01608-0 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Article
van Steenbergen, G. J.
van Straten, B.
Lam, K. Y.
van Veghel, D.
Dekker, L.
Tonino, P. A.
Report on outcomes of valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation and redo surgical aortic valve replacement in the Netherlands
title Report on outcomes of valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation and redo surgical aortic valve replacement in the Netherlands
title_full Report on outcomes of valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation and redo surgical aortic valve replacement in the Netherlands
title_fullStr Report on outcomes of valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation and redo surgical aortic valve replacement in the Netherlands
title_full_unstemmed Report on outcomes of valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation and redo surgical aortic valve replacement in the Netherlands
title_short Report on outcomes of valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation and redo surgical aortic valve replacement in the Netherlands
title_sort report on outcomes of valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation and redo surgical aortic valve replacement in the netherlands
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8799804/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34373997
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12471-021-01608-0
work_keys_str_mv AT vansteenbergengj reportonoutcomesofvalveinvalvetranscatheteraorticvalveimplantationandredosurgicalaorticvalvereplacementinthenetherlands
AT vanstratenb reportonoutcomesofvalveinvalvetranscatheteraorticvalveimplantationandredosurgicalaorticvalvereplacementinthenetherlands
AT lamky reportonoutcomesofvalveinvalvetranscatheteraorticvalveimplantationandredosurgicalaorticvalvereplacementinthenetherlands
AT vanvegheld reportonoutcomesofvalveinvalvetranscatheteraorticvalveimplantationandredosurgicalaorticvalvereplacementinthenetherlands
AT dekkerl reportonoutcomesofvalveinvalvetranscatheteraorticvalveimplantationandredosurgicalaorticvalvereplacementinthenetherlands
AT toninopa reportonoutcomesofvalveinvalvetranscatheteraorticvalveimplantationandredosurgicalaorticvalvereplacementinthenetherlands