Dataset Information

Influence of coronary artery disease and percutaneous coronary intervention on mid-term outcomes in patients with aortic valve stenosis treated with transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

ABSTRACT:

Background

A high frequency of coronary artery disease (CAD) is reported in patients with severe aortic valve stenosis (AS) who undergo transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). However, the optimal management of CAD in these patients remains unknown.

Hypothesis

We hypothesis that AS patients with TAVI complicated by CAD have poor prognosis. His study evaluates the prognoses of patients with CAD and severe AS after TAVI.

Methods

We divided 186 patients with severe AS undergoing TAVI into three groups: those with CAD involving the left main coronary (LM) or proximal left anterior descending artery (LAD) lesion (the CAD[LADp] group), those with CAD not involving the LM or a LAD proximal lesion (the CAD[non-LADp] group), and those without CAD (Non-CAD group). Clinical outcomes were compared among the three groups.

Results

The CAD[LADp] group showed a higher incidence of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs) and all-cause mortality than the other two groups (log-rank p = .001 and p = .008, respectively). Even after adjustment for STS score and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) before TAVI, CAD[LADp] remained associated with MACCE and all-cause mortality. However, PCI for an LM or LAD proximal lesion pre-TAVI did not reduce the risk of these outcomes.

Conclusions

CAD with an LM or LAD proximal lesion is a strong independent predictor of mid-term MACCEs and all-cause mortality in patients with severe AS treated with TAVI. PCI before TAVI did not influence the outcomes.

SUBMITTER: Kaihara T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8364726 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background As younger patients are being considered for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), the assessment and treatment of concomitant coronary artery disease is taking on increased importance. Methods and Results Thirteen contemporary lower-risk patients with TAVI with severe aortic stenosis (AS) and moderate-severe coronary lesions were included. Patients underwent assessment of coronary hemodynamics in the presence of severe AS (pre-TAVI), in the absence of severe AS (immediately post-TAVI), and at longer-term follow-up (6 months post-TAVI). Fractional flow reserve decreased from 0.85 (0.76-0.88) pre-TAVI to 0.79 (0.74-0.83) post-TAVI, and then to 0.71 (0.65-0.77) at 6-month follow-up (P<0.001 for all comparisons). Conversely, instantaneous wave-free ratio was not significantly different: 0.82 (0.80-0.90) pre-TAVI, 0.83 (0.77-0.88) post-TAVI, and 0.83 (0.73-0.89) at 6 months (P=0.735). These changes are explained by the underlying coronary flow. Hyperemic whole-cycle coronary flow (fractional flow reserve flow) increased from 26.36 cm/s (23.82-31.82 cm/s) pre-TAVI to 30.78 cm/s (29.70-34.68 cm/s) post-TAVI (P=0.012), to 40.20 cm/s (32.14-50.00 cm/s) at 6-month follow-up (P<0.001 for both comparisons). Resting flow during the wave-free period of diastole was not significantly different: 25.48 cm/s (21.12-33.65 cm/s) pre-TAVI, 24.54 cm/s (20.74-27.88 cm/s) post-TAVI, and 25.89 cm/s (22.57-28.96 cm/s) at 6 months (P=0.500). Conclusions TAVI acutely improves whole-cycle hyperemic coronary flow, with ongoing sustained improvements at longer-term follow-up. This enhanced response to hyperemic stimuli appears to make fractional flow reserve assessment less suitable for patients with severe AS. Conversely, resting diastolic flow is not significantly influenced by the presence of severe AS. Resting indices of coronary stenosis severity, therefore, appear to be more appropriate for this patient population, although large-scale prospective randomized trials will be required to determine the role of coronary physiology in patients with severe AS.