Dataset Information

Association Between Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement and Early Postprocedural Stroke.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Reducing postprocedural stroke is important to improve the safety of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).

Objective

This study evaluated the trends of stroke occurring within 30 days after the procedure during the first 5 years TAVR was used in the United States, the association of stroke with 30-day mortality, and the association of medical therapy with 30-day stroke risk.

Design, setting, and participants

Retrospective cohort study including 101 430 patients who were treated with femoral and nonfemoral TAVR at 521 US hospitals in the Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Valve Therapies Registry from November 9, 2011, through May 31, 2017. Thirty-day follow-up ended June 30, 2017.

Exposures

TAVR.

Main outcomes and measures

The rates of 30-day transient ischemic attack and stroke were assessed. Association of stroke with 30-day mortality and association of antithrombotic medical therapies with postdischarge 30-day stroke were assessed with a Cox proportional hazards model and propensity-score matching, respectively.

Results

Among 101 430 patients included in the study (median age, 83 years [interquartile range {IQR}, 76-87 years]; 47 797 women [47.1%]; and 85 147 patients [83.9%] treated via femoral access), 30-day postprocedure follow-up data was assessed in all patients. At day 30, there were 2290 patients (2.3%) with a stroke of any kind (95% CI, 2.2%-2.4%), and 373 patients (0.4%) with transient ischemic attacks (95% CI, 0.3%-0.4%) . During the study period, 30-day stroke rates were stable without an increasing or decreasing trend in all patients (P for trend = .22) and in the large femoral access subgroup (P trend = .47). Among cases of stroke within 30 days, 1119 strokes (48.9%) occurred within the first day and 1567 (68.4%) within 3 days following TAVR. The occurrence of stroke was associated with a significant increase in 30-day mortality: 383 patients (16.7%) of 2290 who had a stroke vs 3662 patients (3.7%) of 99 140 who did not have a stroke died (P < .001; risk-adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 6.1 [95% CI, 5.4-6.8]; P < .001). After propensity-score matching, 30-day stroke risk was not associated with whether patients in the femoral cohort were (0.55%) or were not (0.52%) treated with dual antiplatelet therapy at hospital discharge (HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.74-1.46) nor was it associated with whether patients in the nonfemoral cohort were (0.71%) or were not (0.69%) treated with dual antiplatelet therapy (HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.54-1.95). Similarly, 30-day stroke risk was not associated with whether patients in the femoral cohort were (0.57%) or were not (0.55) treated with oral anticoagulant therapy at hospital discharge (HR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.73-1.46) nor was it associated with whether patients in the nonfemoral cohort were (0.75%) or were not (0.82%) treated with an oral anticoagulant (HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.47-1.83).

Conclusions and relevance

Between 2011 and 2017, the rate of 30-day stroke following transcatheter aortic valve replacement in a US registry population remained stable.

SUBMITTER: Huded CP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6582268 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

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.

Project description:ImportanceTranscatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) indications are expanding, leading to an increasing number of patients with bicuspid aortic stenosis undergoing TAVR. Pivotal randomized trials conducted to obtain US Food and Drug Administration approval excluded bicuspid anatomy.ObjectiveTo compare the outcomes of TAVR with a balloon-expandable valve for bicuspid vs tricuspid aortic stenosis.Design, setting, and participantsRegistry-based prospective cohort study of patients undergoing TAVR at 552 US centers. Participants were enrolled in the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS)/American College of Cardiology (ACC) Transcatheter Valve Therapies Registry from June 2015 to November 2018.ExposuresTAVR for bicuspid vs tricuspid aortic stenosis.Main outcomes and measuresPrimary outcomes were 30-day and 1-year mortality and stroke. Secondary outcomes included procedural complications, valve hemodynamics, and quality of life assessment.ResultsOf 81 822 consecutive patients with aortic stenosis (2726 bicuspid; 79 096 tricuspid), 2691 propensity-score matched pairs of bicuspid and tricuspid aortic stenosis were analyzed (median age, 74 years [interquartile range {IQR}, 66-81 years]; 39.1%, women; mean [SD] STS-predicted risk of mortality, 4.9% [4.0%] and 5.1% [4.2%], respectively). All-cause mortality was not significantly different between patients with bicuspid and tricuspid aortic stenosis at 30 days (2.6% vs 2.5%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.04, [95% CI, 0.74-1.47]) and 1 year (10.5% vs 12.0%; HR, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.73-1.10]). The 30-day stroke rate was significantly higher for bicuspid vs tricuspid aortic stenosis (2.5% vs 1.6%; HR, 1.57 [95% CI, 1.06-2.33]). The risk of procedural complications requiring open heart surgery was significantly higher in the bicuspid vs tricuspid cohort (0.9% vs 0.4%, respectively; absolute risk difference [RD], 0.5% [95% CI, 0%-0.9%]). There were no significant differences in valve hemodynamics. There were no significant differences in moderate or severe paravalvular leak at 30 days (2.0% vs 2.4%; absolute RD, 0.3% [95% CI, -1.3% to 0.7%]) and 1 year (3.2% vs 2.5%; absolute RD, 0.7% [95% CI, -1.3% to 2.7%]). At 1 year there was no significant difference in improvement in quality of life between the groups (difference in improvement in the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire overall summary score, -2.4 [95% CI, -5.1 to 0.3]; P = .08).Conclusions and relevanceIn this preliminary, registry-based study of propensity-matched patients who had undergone transcatheter aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis, patients with bicuspid vs tricuspid aortic stenosis had no significant difference in 30-day or 1-year mortality but had increased 30-day risk for stroke. Because of the potential for selection bias and the absence of a control group treated surgically for bicuspid stenosis, randomized trials are needed to adequately assess the efficacy and safety of transcatheter aortic valve replacement for bicuspid aortic stenosis.