Rik Adrichem, A Maarten Mattace-Raso, Thijmen W Hokken, Mark M P van den Dorpel, Marjo J A G de Ronde, Mattie J Lenzen, Paul A Cummins, Isabella Kardys, Rutger-Jan Nuis, Joost Daemen, Jos A Bekkers, Nicolas M Van Mieghem
{"title":"鹿特丹接受主动脉瓣介入治疗的 75 岁以下患者的人口统计学特征和治疗效果。","authors":"Rik Adrichem, A Maarten Mattace-Raso, Thijmen W Hokken, Mark M P van den Dorpel, Marjo J A G de Ronde, Mattie J Lenzen, Paul A Cummins, Isabella Kardys, Rutger-Jan Nuis, Joost Daemen, Jos A Bekkers, Nicolas M Van Mieghem","doi":"10.1007/s12471-024-01888-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is considered a safe and effective alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for elderly patients across the operative risk spectrum. In the Netherlands, TAVI is reimbursed only for patients with a high operative risk. Despite this, one fifth of TAVI patients are < 75 years of age. We aim to compare patient characteristics and outcomes of TAVI and SAVR patients < 75 years.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study included all patients < 75 years without active endocarditis undergoing TAVI or SAVR for severe aortic stenosis, mixed aortic valve disease or degenerated aortic bioprosthesis between 2015 and 2020 at the Erasmus University Medical Centre. Dutch authority guidelines were used to classify operative risk.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>TAVI was performed in 292 patients, SAVR in 386 patients. Based on the Dutch risk algorithm, 59.6% of TAVI patients and 19.4% of SAVR patients were at high operative risk. There was no difference in 30-day all-cause mortality between TAVI and SAVR (2.4% vs 0.8%, p = 0.083). One-year and 5‑year mortality was higher after TAVI than after SAVR (1-year: 12.5% vs 4.3%, p < 0.001; 5‑year: 36.8% vs 12.0%, p < 0.001). Within risk categories we found no difference between treatment strategies. Independent predictors of mortality were cardiovascular comorbidities (left ventricular ejection fraction < 30%, atrial fibrillation, pulmonary hypertension) and the presence of malignancies, liver cirrhosis or immunomodulatory drug use.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>At the Erasmus University Medical Centre, in patients < 75 years, TAVI is selected for higher-risk phenotypes and overall has higher long-term mortality than SAVR. We found no evidence for worse outcome within risk categories.</p>","PeriodicalId":18952,"journal":{"name":"Netherlands Heart Journal","volume":" ","pages":"348-355"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11413251/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Demographics and outcomes of patients younger than 75 years undergoing aortic valve interventions in Rotterdam.\",\"authors\":\"Rik Adrichem, A Maarten Mattace-Raso, Thijmen W Hokken, Mark M P van den Dorpel, Marjo J A G de Ronde, Mattie J Lenzen, Paul A Cummins, Isabella Kardys, Rutger-Jan Nuis, Joost Daemen, Jos A Bekkers, Nicolas M Van Mieghem\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s12471-024-01888-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is considered a safe and effective alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for elderly patients across the operative risk spectrum. In the Netherlands, TAVI is reimbursed only for patients with a high operative risk. Despite this, one fifth of TAVI patients are < 75 years of age. We aim to compare patient characteristics and outcomes of TAVI and SAVR patients < 75 years.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study included all patients < 75 years without active endocarditis undergoing TAVI or SAVR for severe aortic stenosis, mixed aortic valve disease or degenerated aortic bioprosthesis between 2015 and 2020 at the Erasmus University Medical Centre. Dutch authority guidelines were used to classify operative risk.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>TAVI was performed in 292 patients, SAVR in 386 patients. Based on the Dutch risk algorithm, 59.6% of TAVI patients and 19.4% of SAVR patients were at high operative risk. There was no difference in 30-day all-cause mortality between TAVI and SAVR (2.4% vs 0.8%, p = 0.083). One-year and 5‑year mortality was higher after TAVI than after SAVR (1-year: 12.5% vs 4.3%, p < 0.001; 5‑year: 36.8% vs 12.0%, p < 0.001). Within risk categories we found no difference between treatment strategies. Independent predictors of mortality were cardiovascular comorbidities (left ventricular ejection fraction < 30%, atrial fibrillation, pulmonary hypertension) and the presence of malignancies, liver cirrhosis or immunomodulatory drug use.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>At the Erasmus University Medical Centre, in patients < 75 years, TAVI is selected for higher-risk phenotypes and overall has higher long-term mortality than SAVR. We found no evidence for worse outcome within risk categories.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18952,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Netherlands Heart Journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"348-355\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11413251/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Netherlands Heart Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12471-024-01888-2\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/8/20 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Netherlands Heart Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12471-024-01888-2","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Demographics and outcomes of patients younger than 75 years undergoing aortic valve interventions in Rotterdam.
Background: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is considered a safe and effective alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for elderly patients across the operative risk spectrum. In the Netherlands, TAVI is reimbursed only for patients with a high operative risk. Despite this, one fifth of TAVI patients are < 75 years of age. We aim to compare patient characteristics and outcomes of TAVI and SAVR patients < 75 years.
Methods: This study included all patients < 75 years without active endocarditis undergoing TAVI or SAVR for severe aortic stenosis, mixed aortic valve disease or degenerated aortic bioprosthesis between 2015 and 2020 at the Erasmus University Medical Centre. Dutch authority guidelines were used to classify operative risk.
Results: TAVI was performed in 292 patients, SAVR in 386 patients. Based on the Dutch risk algorithm, 59.6% of TAVI patients and 19.4% of SAVR patients were at high operative risk. There was no difference in 30-day all-cause mortality between TAVI and SAVR (2.4% vs 0.8%, p = 0.083). One-year and 5‑year mortality was higher after TAVI than after SAVR (1-year: 12.5% vs 4.3%, p < 0.001; 5‑year: 36.8% vs 12.0%, p < 0.001). Within risk categories we found no difference between treatment strategies. Independent predictors of mortality were cardiovascular comorbidities (left ventricular ejection fraction < 30%, atrial fibrillation, pulmonary hypertension) and the presence of malignancies, liver cirrhosis or immunomodulatory drug use.
Conclusion: At the Erasmus University Medical Centre, in patients < 75 years, TAVI is selected for higher-risk phenotypes and overall has higher long-term mortality than SAVR. We found no evidence for worse outcome within risk categories.
期刊介绍:
The scope of the Netherlands Heart Journal is to contribute to the national and international literature by publishing scientific papers in the field of cardiovascular medicine. It also provides a platform for Continuing Medical Education for cardiologists and those in training for the speciality of cardiology in the Netherlands.
The Netherlands Heart Journal is made available to cardiologists, cardiologists in training, cardiopulmonary surgeons, cardiopulmonary surgeons in training, internists and paediatric cardiologists. The journal is the official journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology.