Dataset Information

Predictors of poor outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: results from the PARTNER (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valve) trial.

ABSTRACT: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a less invasive option for treatment of high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis. We sought to identify patients at high risk for poor outcome after TAVR using a novel definition of outcome that integrates quality of life with mortality.Among 2137 patients who underwent TAVR in the PARTNER (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valve) trial or its associated continued access registry, quality of life was assessed with the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire-Overall Summary Scale (KCCQ-OS; range 0-100, where a higher score equates to a better quality of life) at baseline and at 1, 6, and 12 months after TAVR. A poor 6-month outcome (defined as death, KCCQ-OS score <45, or ?10-point decrease in KCCQ-OS score compared with baseline) occurred in 704 patients (33%). Using a split-sample design, we developed a multivariable model to identify a parsimonious set of covariates to identify patients at high risk for poor outcome. The model demonstrated moderate discrimination (c-index=0.66) and good calibration with the observed data, performed similarly in the separate validation cohort (c-index=0.64), and identified 211 patients (10% of the population) with a ?50% likelihood of a poor outcome after TAVR. A second model that explored predictors of poor outcome at 1 year identified 1102 patients (52%) with ?50% likelihood and 178 (8%) with ?70% likelihood of a poor 1-year outcome after TAVR.Using a large, multicenter cohort, we have developed and validated predictive models that can identify patients at high risk for a poor outcome after TAVR. Although model discrimination was moderate, these models may help guide treatment choices and offer patients realistic expectations of outcomes based on their presenting characteristics.http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00530894.

SUBMITTER: Arnold SV

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4198056 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Predictors of poor outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: results from the PARTNER (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valve) trial.

Arnold Suzanne V SV Reynolds Matthew R MR Lei Yang Y Magnuson Elizabeth A EA Kirtane Ajay J AJ Kodali Susheel K SK Zajarias Alan A Thourani Vinod H VH Green Philip P Rodés-Cabau Josep J Beohar Nirat N Mack Michael J MJ Leon Martin B MB Cohen David J DJ

Circulation 20140523 25

<h4>Background</h4>Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a less invasive option for treatment of high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis. We sought to identify patients at high risk for poor outcome after TAVR using a novel definition of outcome that integrates quality of life with mortality.<h4>Methods and results</h4>Among 2137 patients who underwent TAVR in the PARTNER (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valve) trial or its associated continued access registry, quality of lif ...[more]

PMID: 24958751

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo identify outcomes of patients undergoing emergency transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and determine predictors of in-hospital mortality.BackgroundEmergency TAVR has emerged as a viable treatment strategy for patients with decompensated severe aortic stenosis and/or regurgitation; however, data on patients undergoing emergency TAVR are limited.MethodsAll emergency TAVR procedures were identified from a single tertiary academic center between January 2015 and August 2018.Results31 patients underwent emergency TAVR due to cardiogenic shock (26 patients), electrical instability with incessant ventricular tachycardia (2 patients), severe refractory angina (2 patients), and decompensated heart failure with hypoxemic respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation (1 patient). Mechanical circulatory support (MCS) was used in 16 (51.6%). MCS initiation occurred immediately prior to TAVR in 10 patients and placed post-TAVR in 6 patients. 6 patients died before hospital discharge (in-hospital mortality 19.4%). 1-year and 2-year survival rates were 61.0% and 55.9%, respectively. Univariate predictors of in-hospital mortality were preprocedural pulmonary artery pulsatility index (PAPi) ≤1.8 (66.7% vs. 20.0%, p=0.01), intraprocedural cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) (83.3% vs 4.0%, p ≤ 0.001), acute kidney injury post-TAVR (80.0% vs. 4.2%, p ≤ 0.001), initiation of dialysis post-TAVR (60.0% vs. 4.2%, p ≤ 0.001), and MCS initiation post-TAVR (50.0% vs. 12.0%, p=0.03). MCS initiation before TAVR was associated with improved survival compared with post-TAVR initiation.ConclusionEmergency TAVR in extreme risk patients with acute decompensated heart failure or cardiogenic shock secondary to severe aortic valve disease is associated with high in-hospital mortality rates. Careful patient selection taking into account right heart function, assessed by PAPi, and early utilization of MCS may improve survival following emergency TAVR.

Project description:BackgroundStroke remains a devastating complication of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), which has persisted despite refinements in technique and increased operator experience. While cerebral embolic protection devices (EPDs) have been developed to mitigate this risk, data regarding their impact on stroke and other outcomes after TAVR are limited.MethodsWe performed an observational study using data from the Society for Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Valve Therapy Registry. Patients were included if they underwent elective or urgent transfemoral TAVR between January 2018 and December 2019. The primary outcome was in-hospital stroke. To adjust for confounding, the association between EPD use and clinical outcomes was evaluated using instrumental variable analysis, a technique designed to support causal inference from observational data, with site-level preference for EPD use within the same quarter of the procedure as the instrument. We also performed a propensity score-based secondary analysis using overlap weights.ResultsOur analytic sample included 123 186 patients from 599 sites. The use of EPD during TAVR increased over time, reaching 28% of sites and 13% of TAVR procedures by December 2019. There was wide variation in EPD use across hospitals, with 8% of sites performing >50% of TAVR procedures with an EPD and 72% performing no procedures with an EPD in the last quarter of 2019. In our primary analysis using the instrumental variable model, there was no association between EPD use and in-hospital stroke (adjusted relative risk, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.68-1.13]; absolute risk difference, -0.15% [95% CI, -0.49 to 0.20]). However, in our secondary analysis using the propensity score-based model, EPD use was associated with 18% lower odds of in-hospital stroke (adjusted odds ratio, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.69-0.97]; absolute risk difference, -0.28% [95% CI, -0.52 to -0.03]). Results were generally consistent across the secondary end points, as well as subgroup analyses.ConclusionsIn this nationally representative observational study, we did not find an association between EPD use for TAVR and in-hospital stroke in our primary instrumental variable analysis, and found only a modestly lower risk of in-hospital stroke in our secondary propensity-weighted analysis. These findings provide a strong basis for large-scale randomized, controlled trials to test whether EPDs provide meaningful clinical benefit for patients undergoing TAVR.

Project description:BACKGROUNDA series of models have been developed to identify patients at high risk for poor outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) to help guide treatment choices, offer patients realistic expectations of long-term outcomes, and support decision making.OBJECTIVESThis study examined the performance of the previously developed TAVR Poor Outcome risk models in an external dataset and explored the incremental contribution of geriatric domains to model performance.METHODSPoor outcome after TAVR was defined as death, poor quality of life (QOL), or decline in QOL, as assessed using the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire. We tested 4 TAVR Poor Outcome risk models: 6-month and 1-year full and clinical (reduced) models. We examined each model's discrimination and calibration in the CoreValve trial dataset, and then tested the incremental contribution of frailty and disability markers to the model's discrimination using the incremental discrimination index.RESULTSAmong 2,830 patients who underwent TAVR in the CoreValve US Pivotal Extreme and High Risk trials and associated continued access registries, 31.2% experienced a poor outcome at 6 months following TAVR (death, 17.6%; very poor QOL, 11.6%; QOL decline, 2.0%) and 50.8% experienced a poor outcome at 1 year (death, 30.2%; poor QOL, 19.6%; QOL, decline 1.0%). The models demonstrated similar discrimination as in the Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves Trial cohorts (c-indexes, 0.637 to 0.665) and excellent calibration. Adding frailty as a syndrome increased the c-indexes by 0.000 to 0.004 (incremental discrimination index, p < 0.01 for all except the 1-year clinical model), with the most important individual components being disability and unintentional weight loss.CONCLUSIONSAlthough discrimination of the TAVR Poor Outcome risk models was generally moderate, calibration was excellent among patients with different risk profiles and treated with a different TAVR device. These findings demonstrated the value of these models for individualizing outcome predictions in high-risk patients undergoing TAVR.

Project description:ImportanceThe Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services national coverage determination for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) includes volume requirements for surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for hospitals seeking to initiate or continue TAVR programs. Evidence regarding the association between SAVR volume and TAVR outcomes is limited.ObjectiveTo examine the association of hospital SAVR and combined SAVR and TAVR volumes with patient outcomes of TAVR procedures performed within 1 year, 2 years, and for the entire period after initiation of TAVR programs.Design, setting, and participantsThis observational cohort study included 60 538 TAVR procedures performed in 438 hospitals between October 1, 2011, and December 31, 2015, among Medicare beneficiaries.Main outcomes and measuresThe associations between SAVR volume, SAVR and TAVR volumes, and risks of death, death or stroke, and readmissions within 30 days were determined using a hierarchical logistic regression model adjusting for patient and hospital characteristics. The association between SAVR and SAVR and TAVR volumes and 1-year and 2-year mortality after TAVR procedures was determined using a multivariable proportional hazard model with a robust variance estimator. The associations for procedures performed within 1 year, 2 years, and for the entire period after initiation of TAVR programs were examined.ResultsAmong the 60 538 patients, 29 173 were women and 31 365 were men, with a mean (SD) age of 82.3 (8.0) years. Hospitals with high SAVR volume (mean annual volume, ≥97 per year) were more likely to adopt TAVR early and had a higher growth in TAVR volumes over time (median TAVR volume by hospitals with high SAVR volume and low SAVR volume: year 1, 32 vs 19; year 2, 48 vs 28; year 3, 82 vs 38; year 4, 118 vs 54; P < .001). In adjusted analysis, high hospital SAVR volume alone was not associated with better patient outcomes after TAVR. When hospital TAVR and SAVR volumes were jointly analyzed, patients treated in hospitals with high TAVR volume had lower 30-day mortality after TAVR (high TAVR and low SAVR vs low TAVR and low SAVR: odds ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.72-0.99; high TAVR and high SAVR vs low TAVR and high SAVR: odds ratio, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.69-0.95), the effect of which was more pronounced when hospitals also had high SAVR volume. Patients treated in hospitals with high SAVR volume and high TAVR volume had the lowest 30-day mortality (vs hospitals with low SAVR volume and TAVR volume: odds ratio, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.66-0.89).Conclusions and relevanceHospitals with high SAVR volume are most likely to be fast adopters of TAVR. Hospital SAVR volume alone is not associated with better TAVR outcomes. Accumulating high volumes of TAVR is associated with lower mortality after TAVR, particularly when hospitals have high SAVR volumes. Hospitals with high caseloads of both SAVR and TAVR are likely to achieve the best outcomes.

Dataset Information

Predictors of poor outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: results from the PARTNER (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valve) trial.

Publications

Predictors of poor outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: results from the PARTNER (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valve) trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets