Troels Højsgaard Jørgensen MD, PhD , Hans Gustav Hørsted Thyregod MD, PhD , Mikko Savontaus MD, PhD , Öjvind Bleie MD, PhD , Evald H Christiansen MD, PhD , Matti Niemela MD, PhD , Oskar Angerås MD, PhD , Ingibjörg J. Gudmundsdóttir MD, DM , Mika Laine MD, PhD , Andreas Rück MD, PhD , Bernard Prendergast MD, DMSc , Martin Leon MD, PhD , Lars Søndergaard MD, DMSc , Ole De Backer MD, PhD , NOTION-2 investigators
{"title":"70岁或以下严重主动脉狭窄患者的经导管或手术主动脉瓣置换术-一项notion2亚研究","authors":"Troels Højsgaard Jørgensen MD, PhD , Hans Gustav Hørsted Thyregod MD, PhD , Mikko Savontaus MD, PhD , Öjvind Bleie MD, PhD , Evald H Christiansen MD, PhD , Matti Niemela MD, PhD , Oskar Angerås MD, PhD , Ingibjörg J. Gudmundsdóttir MD, DM , Mika Laine MD, PhD , Andreas Rück MD, PhD , Bernard Prendergast MD, DMSc , Martin Leon MD, PhD , Lars Søndergaard MD, DMSc , Ole De Backer MD, PhD , NOTION-2 investigators","doi":"10.1016/j.ahj.2025.02.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This NOTION-2 sub-study revealed distinct outcomes for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in low surgical risk patients aged ≤ 70 years with a tricuspid or bicuspid aortic valve stenosis (AS). One year after intervention, the risk of death, stroke or rehospitalization in patients with tricuspid AS was similar after TAVR when compared to SAVR (absolute risk difference: −2.0%; 95% confidence interval (CI): −11.8% to 7.7%) Conversely, in patients with bicuspid AS, TAVR was associated with a significantly higher risk of adverse outcomes (absolute risk difference: 13.8%; 95% CI: 1.2% to 26.3%). These analyses are exploratory, but highlight the importance of tailoring the intervention to the patient's clinical risk profile, life expectancy, native aortic valve morphology and the anticipated risks associated with TAVR or SAVR.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":7868,"journal":{"name":"American heart journal","volume":"284 ","pages":"Pages 67-70"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Transcatheter or surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with severe aortic stenosis aged 70 years or younger: A NOTION-2 substudy\",\"authors\":\"Troels Højsgaard Jørgensen MD, PhD , Hans Gustav Hørsted Thyregod MD, PhD , Mikko Savontaus MD, PhD , Öjvind Bleie MD, PhD , Evald H Christiansen MD, PhD , Matti Niemela MD, PhD , Oskar Angerås MD, PhD , Ingibjörg J. Gudmundsdóttir MD, DM , Mika Laine MD, PhD , Andreas Rück MD, PhD , Bernard Prendergast MD, DMSc , Martin Leon MD, PhD , Lars Søndergaard MD, DMSc , Ole De Backer MD, PhD , NOTION-2 investigators\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ahj.2025.02.003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>This NOTION-2 sub-study revealed distinct outcomes for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in low surgical risk patients aged ≤ 70 years with a tricuspid or bicuspid aortic valve stenosis (AS). One year after intervention, the risk of death, stroke or rehospitalization in patients with tricuspid AS was similar after TAVR when compared to SAVR (absolute risk difference: −2.0%; 95% confidence interval (CI): −11.8% to 7.7%) Conversely, in patients with bicuspid AS, TAVR was associated with a significantly higher risk of adverse outcomes (absolute risk difference: 13.8%; 95% CI: 1.2% to 26.3%). These analyses are exploratory, but highlight the importance of tailoring the intervention to the patient's clinical risk profile, life expectancy, native aortic valve morphology and the anticipated risks associated with TAVR or SAVR.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7868,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American heart journal\",\"volume\":\"284 \",\"pages\":\"Pages 67-70\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American heart journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002870325000341\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American heart journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002870325000341","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Transcatheter or surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with severe aortic stenosis aged 70 years or younger: A NOTION-2 substudy
This NOTION-2 sub-study revealed distinct outcomes for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in low surgical risk patients aged ≤ 70 years with a tricuspid or bicuspid aortic valve stenosis (AS). One year after intervention, the risk of death, stroke or rehospitalization in patients with tricuspid AS was similar after TAVR when compared to SAVR (absolute risk difference: −2.0%; 95% confidence interval (CI): −11.8% to 7.7%) Conversely, in patients with bicuspid AS, TAVR was associated with a significantly higher risk of adverse outcomes (absolute risk difference: 13.8%; 95% CI: 1.2% to 26.3%). These analyses are exploratory, but highlight the importance of tailoring the intervention to the patient's clinical risk profile, life expectancy, native aortic valve morphology and the anticipated risks associated with TAVR or SAVR.
期刊介绍:
The American Heart Journal will consider for publication suitable articles on topics pertaining to the broad discipline of cardiovascular disease. Our goal is to provide the reader primary investigation, scholarly review, and opinion concerning the practice of cardiovascular medicine. We especially encourage submission of 3 types of reports that are not frequently seen in cardiovascular journals: negative clinical studies, reports on study designs, and studies involving the organization of medical care. The Journal does not accept individual case reports or original articles involving bench laboratory or animal research.