Zulfugar T. Taghiyev, Martin V. Fuchs, Katharina E. Jäger, Oliver Dörr, Peter Roth, Andreas Böning
{"title":"冠心病和主动脉瓣狭窄的联合治疗","authors":"Zulfugar T. Taghiyev, Martin V. Fuchs, Katharina E. Jäger, Oliver Dörr, Peter Roth, Andreas Böning","doi":"10.1155/jocs/3489054","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><b>Objectives:</b> This study evaluated early and midterm prognostic outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in combination with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) compared with surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) plus coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with severe aortic stenosis and anatomically complex coronary artery disease (CAD).</p><p><b>Methods:</b> Between 2010 and 2020, 1232 consecutive patients underwent TAVI with PCI or SAVR with CABG at a tertiary referral center. Eligibility required the presence of complex CAD (SYNTAX I score > 22). Propensity score matching (1:1) generated 76 well-balanced patient pairs. The primary endpoint was early mortality; secondary endpoints included major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) and midterm mortality.</p><p><b>Results:</b> Matched cohorts exhibited intermediate operative risk (STS score: 3.0 ± 1.7 vs. 3.4 ± 1.2; EuroSCORE II: 6.89 ± 4.3 vs. 7.41 ± 4.7). No significant intergroup differences were observed regarding all-cause mortality (<i>p</i> = 0.262), ischemic stroke (<i>p</i> = 0.527), or myocardial infarction (<i>p</i> = 0.474) during follow-up. Similarly, reintervention rates did not differ (<i>p</i> = 0.515, HR: 2.1, 95% CI: 0.282–15.200). MACCE (<i>p</i> = 0.061, HR: 1.8, 95% CI: 0.938–3.509) and new pacemaker implantation (<i>p</i> = 0.087, HR: 0.5, 95% CI: 0.187–1.089) occurred numerically more frequently in the TAVI + PCI group without statistical significance. Prosthetic valve regurgitation > Grade II was less common in SAVR + CABG, whereas mean transvalvular gradients favored TAVI + PCI.</p><p><b>Conclusion:</b> In patients with severe aortic stenosis and advanced CAD, TAVI + PCI yielded overall outcomes comparable to SAVR + CABG. However, the surgical strategy demonstrated superiority in terms of MACCE incidence and device-related conduction disturbances. Prospective randomized evidence is imperative to optimize patient selection and refine guideline-directed decision-making in this complex cohort.</p>","PeriodicalId":15367,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cardiac Surgery","volume":"2025 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1155/jocs/3489054","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Combined Treatment for Coronary Artery Disease and Aortic Valve Stenosis\",\"authors\":\"Zulfugar T. Taghiyev, Martin V. Fuchs, Katharina E. Jäger, Oliver Dörr, Peter Roth, Andreas Böning\",\"doi\":\"10.1155/jocs/3489054\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><b>Objectives:</b> This study evaluated early and midterm prognostic outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in combination with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) compared with surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) plus coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with severe aortic stenosis and anatomically complex coronary artery disease (CAD).</p><p><b>Methods:</b> Between 2010 and 2020, 1232 consecutive patients underwent TAVI with PCI or SAVR with CABG at a tertiary referral center. Eligibility required the presence of complex CAD (SYNTAX I score > 22). Propensity score matching (1:1) generated 76 well-balanced patient pairs. The primary endpoint was early mortality; secondary endpoints included major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) and midterm mortality.</p><p><b>Results:</b> Matched cohorts exhibited intermediate operative risk (STS score: 3.0 ± 1.7 vs. 3.4 ± 1.2; EuroSCORE II: 6.89 ± 4.3 vs. 7.41 ± 4.7). No significant intergroup differences were observed regarding all-cause mortality (<i>p</i> = 0.262), ischemic stroke (<i>p</i> = 0.527), or myocardial infarction (<i>p</i> = 0.474) during follow-up. Similarly, reintervention rates did not differ (<i>p</i> = 0.515, HR: 2.1, 95% CI: 0.282–15.200). MACCE (<i>p</i> = 0.061, HR: 1.8, 95% CI: 0.938–3.509) and new pacemaker implantation (<i>p</i> = 0.087, HR: 0.5, 95% CI: 0.187–1.089) occurred numerically more frequently in the TAVI + PCI group without statistical significance. Prosthetic valve regurgitation > Grade II was less common in SAVR + CABG, whereas mean transvalvular gradients favored TAVI + PCI.</p><p><b>Conclusion:</b> In patients with severe aortic stenosis and advanced CAD, TAVI + PCI yielded overall outcomes comparable to SAVR + CABG. However, the surgical strategy demonstrated superiority in terms of MACCE incidence and device-related conduction disturbances. Prospective randomized evidence is imperative to optimize patient selection and refine guideline-directed decision-making in this complex cohort.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15367,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Cardiac Surgery\",\"volume\":\"2025 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1155/jocs/3489054\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Cardiac Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/jocs/3489054\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cardiac Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/jocs/3489054","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Combined Treatment for Coronary Artery Disease and Aortic Valve Stenosis
Objectives: This study evaluated early and midterm prognostic outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in combination with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) compared with surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) plus coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with severe aortic stenosis and anatomically complex coronary artery disease (CAD).
Methods: Between 2010 and 2020, 1232 consecutive patients underwent TAVI with PCI or SAVR with CABG at a tertiary referral center. Eligibility required the presence of complex CAD (SYNTAX I score > 22). Propensity score matching (1:1) generated 76 well-balanced patient pairs. The primary endpoint was early mortality; secondary endpoints included major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) and midterm mortality.
Results: Matched cohorts exhibited intermediate operative risk (STS score: 3.0 ± 1.7 vs. 3.4 ± 1.2; EuroSCORE II: 6.89 ± 4.3 vs. 7.41 ± 4.7). No significant intergroup differences were observed regarding all-cause mortality (p = 0.262), ischemic stroke (p = 0.527), or myocardial infarction (p = 0.474) during follow-up. Similarly, reintervention rates did not differ (p = 0.515, HR: 2.1, 95% CI: 0.282–15.200). MACCE (p = 0.061, HR: 1.8, 95% CI: 0.938–3.509) and new pacemaker implantation (p = 0.087, HR: 0.5, 95% CI: 0.187–1.089) occurred numerically more frequently in the TAVI + PCI group without statistical significance. Prosthetic valve regurgitation > Grade II was less common in SAVR + CABG, whereas mean transvalvular gradients favored TAVI + PCI.
Conclusion: In patients with severe aortic stenosis and advanced CAD, TAVI + PCI yielded overall outcomes comparable to SAVR + CABG. However, the surgical strategy demonstrated superiority in terms of MACCE incidence and device-related conduction disturbances. Prospective randomized evidence is imperative to optimize patient selection and refine guideline-directed decision-making in this complex cohort.
期刊介绍：
Journal of Cardiac Surgery (JCS) is a peer-reviewed journal devoted to contemporary surgical treatment of cardiac disease. Renown for its detailed "how to" methods, JCS''s well-illustrated, concise technical articles, critical reviews and commentaries are highly valued by dedicated readers worldwide.
With Editor-in-Chief Harold Lazar, MD and an internationally prominent editorial board, JCS continues its 20-year history as an important professional resource. Editorial coverage includes biologic support, mechanical cardiac assist and/or replacement and surgical techniques, and features current material on topics such as OPCAB surgery, stented and stentless valves, endovascular stent placement, atrial fibrillation, transplantation, percutaneous valve repair/replacement, left ventricular restoration surgery, immunobiology, and bridges to transplant and recovery.
In addition, special sections (Images in Cardiac Surgery, Cardiac Regeneration) and historical reviews stimulate reader interest. The journal also routinely publishes proceedings of important international symposia in a timely manner.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
