Five-year outcomes after surgical versus transcatheter aortic valve replacement with new generation devices from the prospective OBSERVANT studies.

IF 3.1 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Stefano Rosato, Fausto Biancari, Marco Barbanti, Giuseppe Tarantini, Marco Ranucci, Giuliano Costa, Timo Mäkikallio, Gian Paolo Ussia, Giovanni Baglio, Mahin Tatari, Gabriella Badoni, Paola D'Errigo
{"title":"Five-year outcomes after surgical versus transcatheter aortic valve replacement with new generation devices from the prospective OBSERVANT studies.","authors":"Stefano Rosato, Fausto Biancari, Marco Barbanti, Giuseppe Tarantini, Marco Ranucci, Giuliano Costa, Timo Mäkikallio, Gian Paolo Ussia, Giovanni Baglio, Mahin Tatari, Gabriella Badoni, Paola D'Errigo","doi":"10.1007/s12928-025-01155-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The efficacy and durability of transcatheter (TAVR) over surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for severe aortic stenosis (AS) has been demonstrated in randomized studies, but these findings were not confirmed in several observational studies. This is an analysis of 5706 AS patients who underwent SAVR from 2010 and 2012, and 2989 AS patients who underwent TAVR from 2017 and 2018 from the prospective OBSERVANT I and II studies. TAVR procedures were performed with new-generation devices. Five-year all-cause mortality was the primary outcome of this analysis. Propensity score matching yielded 1008 pairs of TAVR and SAVR patients. The mean EuroSCORE II was comparable between the study cohorts (TAVR 4.7 ± 4.0% and SAVR 4.5 ± 5.7%, p = 0.419). At 5 years, TAVR was associated with higher mortality (44.4% vs. 33.2%, HR 1.36, 95%CI 1.18-1.57, Log-rank test p < 0.001), major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs) (49.3% vs. 37.9%, HR 1.32, 95%CI 1.15-1.51, Log-rank test p < 0.001), permanent pacemaker implantation (23.1% vs. 9.3%, HR 2.72, 95%CI 2.14-3.45, Log-rank test p < 0.001) and percutaneous coronary intervention rates (3.7% vs. 1.2%, HR 3.44, 95%CI 1.76-6.71, Log-rank test p < 0.001) compared to SAVR. Age ≤ 80 years, male gender, EuroSCORE II ≤ 4.0%, absence of coronary artery disease and absence of diabetes were associated with higher 5-year mortality after TAVR compared to SAVR. TAVR had a significantly higher 5-year mortality than SAVR both in patients with left ventricular ejection fraction ≤ 50% and > 50%. This observational study from prospective data showed that TAVR using new-generation devices was associated with increased rates of all-cause mortality compared to SAVR at 5 years. These findings should be viewed considering the non-randomized nature of this study and may be attributable to the characteristics of patients selected for TAVR, rather than the procedure itself.</p>","PeriodicalId":9439,"journal":{"name":"Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12928-025-01155-0","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"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

The efficacy and durability of transcatheter (TAVR) over surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for severe aortic stenosis (AS) has been demonstrated in randomized studies, but these findings were not confirmed in several observational studies. This is an analysis of 5706 AS patients who underwent SAVR from 2010 and 2012, and 2989 AS patients who underwent TAVR from 2017 and 2018 from the prospective OBSERVANT I and II studies. TAVR procedures were performed with new-generation devices. Five-year all-cause mortality was the primary outcome of this analysis. Propensity score matching yielded 1008 pairs of TAVR and SAVR patients. The mean EuroSCORE II was comparable between the study cohorts (TAVR 4.7 ± 4.0% and SAVR 4.5 ± 5.7%, p = 0.419). At 5 years, TAVR was associated with higher mortality (44.4% vs. 33.2%, HR 1.36, 95%CI 1.18-1.57, Log-rank test p < 0.001), major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs) (49.3% vs. 37.9%, HR 1.32, 95%CI 1.15-1.51, Log-rank test p < 0.001), permanent pacemaker implantation (23.1% vs. 9.3%, HR 2.72, 95%CI 2.14-3.45, Log-rank test p < 0.001) and percutaneous coronary intervention rates (3.7% vs. 1.2%, HR 3.44, 95%CI 1.76-6.71, Log-rank test p < 0.001) compared to SAVR. Age ≤ 80 years, male gender, EuroSCORE II ≤ 4.0%, absence of coronary artery disease and absence of diabetes were associated with higher 5-year mortality after TAVR compared to SAVR. TAVR had a significantly higher 5-year mortality than SAVR both in patients with left ventricular ejection fraction ≤ 50% and > 50%. This observational study from prospective data showed that TAVR using new-generation devices was associated with increased rates of all-cause mortality compared to SAVR at 5 years. These findings should be viewed considering the non-randomized nature of this study and may be attributable to the characteristics of patients selected for TAVR, rather than the procedure itself.

来自前瞻性OBSERVANT研究的手术与新一代装置经导管主动脉瓣置换术后的5年预后。
经导管(TAVR)比外科主动脉瓣置换术(SAVR)治疗严重主动脉瓣狭窄(AS)的疗效和持久性已在随机研究中得到证实,但这些发现未在一些观察性研究中得到证实。这是对2010年至2012年5706例接受SAVR的AS患者和2017年至2018年2989例接受TAVR的AS患者的前瞻性观察I和II研究的分析。TAVR手术采用新一代器械。5年全因死亡率是本分析的主要结果。倾向评分匹配产生1008对TAVR和SAVR患者。研究队列之间的平均EuroSCORE II具有可比性(TAVR 4.7±4.0%和SAVR 4.5±5.7%,p = 0.419)。5年时,TAVR与较高的死亡率相关(44.4% vs. 33.2%, HR 1.36, 95%CI 1.18-1.57, Log-rank检验p为50%)。这项前瞻性数据的观察性研究表明,与SAVR相比,使用新一代装置的TAVR与5年全因死亡率增加有关。考虑到这项研究的非随机性质,这些发现应该被视为可能归因于选择TAVR的患者的特征,而不是手术本身。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics
Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
12.50%
发文量
68
期刊介绍: Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics (CVIT) is an international journal covering the field of cardiovascular disease and includes cardiac (coronary and noncoronary) and peripheral interventions and therapeutics. Articles are subject to peer review and complete editorial evaluation prior to any decision regarding acceptability. CVIT is an official journal of The Japanese Association of Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信