Parsa Saberian, Rafael Contreras, Anoop Gurram, Amir Nasrollahizadeh, Narsimha Rao Keetha, Anthony Loc Nguyen, Sandeep Samethadka Nayak, Mohammad-Hossein Keivanlou, Mohammad Hashemi, Ehsan Amini-Salehi, Daniyal Ameen
{"title":"Clinical Outcomes and Prognostic Implications of TAVR in Patients With Active Cancer: A Meta-Analysis","authors":"Parsa Saberian, Rafael Contreras, Anoop Gurram, Amir Nasrollahizadeh, Narsimha Rao Keetha, Anthony Loc Nguyen, Sandeep Samethadka Nayak, Mohammad-Hossein Keivanlou, Mohammad Hashemi, Ehsan Amini-Salehi, Daniyal Ameen","doi":"10.1002/clc.70121","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is an alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS). However, the clinical outcomes and prognostic implications of TAVR in patients with active cancer remain uncertain. This meta-analysis evaluates procedural success, complications, and survival outcomes of TAVR in patients with and without active cancer.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>A comprehensive literature search was conducted across PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. Statistical analysis was performed using a random-effects model. Statistical analyses were conducted using STATA version 18.0.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>The results of the meta-analysis showed no significant difference in in-hospital mortality between cancer and non-cancer patients (OR = 1.17; 95% CI: 0.83, 1.65; <i>p</i> = 0.27). Similarly, 30-day mortality did not differ between the two groups (OR = 0.93; 95% CI: 0.72, 1.19; <i>p</i> = 0.49). However, 1-year mortality was significantly higher in cancer patients (OR = 1.93; 95% CI: 1.45, 2.56; <i>p</i> < 0.01). Two-year mortality was also higher in cancer patients (OR = 2.65; 95% CI: 1.79, 3.93; <i>p</i> < 0.01). No significant differences were observed in major bleeding, acute kidney injury, stroke, or permanent pacemaker implantation between the groups.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>While TAVR offers comparable in-hospital and short-term survival outcomes for cancer and non-cancer patients, long-term mortality is significantly higher in those with active cancer. These findings suggest that TAVR is a viable option for cancer patients with severe AS but requires careful long-term prognostic considerations. Further studies are needed to optimize management strategies for this complex population.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":10201,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Cardiology","volume":"48 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/clc.70121","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Cardiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/clc.70121","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background
Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is an alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS). However, the clinical outcomes and prognostic implications of TAVR in patients with active cancer remain uncertain. This meta-analysis evaluates procedural success, complications, and survival outcomes of TAVR in patients with and without active cancer.
Methods
A comprehensive literature search was conducted across PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. Statistical analysis was performed using a random-effects model. Statistical analyses were conducted using STATA version 18.0.
Results
The results of the meta-analysis showed no significant difference in in-hospital mortality between cancer and non-cancer patients (OR = 1.17; 95% CI: 0.83, 1.65; p = 0.27). Similarly, 30-day mortality did not differ between the two groups (OR = 0.93; 95% CI: 0.72, 1.19; p = 0.49). However, 1-year mortality was significantly higher in cancer patients (OR = 1.93; 95% CI: 1.45, 2.56; p < 0.01). Two-year mortality was also higher in cancer patients (OR = 2.65; 95% CI: 1.79, 3.93; p < 0.01). No significant differences were observed in major bleeding, acute kidney injury, stroke, or permanent pacemaker implantation between the groups.
Conclusion
While TAVR offers comparable in-hospital and short-term survival outcomes for cancer and non-cancer patients, long-term mortality is significantly higher in those with active cancer. These findings suggest that TAVR is a viable option for cancer patients with severe AS but requires careful long-term prognostic considerations. Further studies are needed to optimize management strategies for this complex population.
期刊介绍:
Clinical Cardiology provides a fully Gold Open Access forum for the publication of original clinical research, as well as brief reviews of diagnostic and therapeutic issues in cardiovascular medicine and cardiovascular surgery.
The journal includes Clinical Investigations, Reviews, free standing editorials and commentaries, and bonus online-only content.
The journal also publishes supplements, Expert Panel Discussions, sponsored clinical Reviews, Trial Designs, and Quality and Outcomes.