AIMS: We sought to evaluate the outcome of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with the CoreValve Revalving System (CRS-TAVR) in inoperable patients presenting with severe aortic regurgitation (AR), compared to in patients treated for severe native aortic stenosis (AS). From October 2008 to January 2013, 1,557 consecutive patients undergoing CRS-TAVR, of whom 26 (1.6%) presented with AR, were prospectively followed. Compared with patients with AS, patients with AR were significantly younger (mean age 73±10 vs. 82±6, p=0.02), more frequently in NYHA Class III/IV (95% vs. 73%, p=0.01) and had a higher incidence of severe pulmonary hypertension (sPAP >60 mmHg, 31% vs. 10%, p=0.007). Log EuroSCORE and STS score were similar. VARC-2-defined device success was lower in the AR group (79% vs. 96%, p=0.006). At one month, patients treated for AR had a higher overall mortality (23% vs. 5.9%; OR 4.22 [3.03-8.28], p<0.001) and cardiac mortality (15.3% vs. 4%, OR 4.01 [2.40-7.66], p<0.001). Results were consistent at 12 months: overall mortality (31% vs. 19%, HR 2.1 [1.5-4.41], p<0.001) and cardiac mortality (19.2% vs. 6%, HR 3.1 [2.09-8.22], p<0.001). CRS-TAVR for AR is associated with a significantly higher mortality compared to CRS-TAVR for AS. Considering the ominous prognosis of these patients when treated medically, TAVR may be a reasonable choice in selected patients. In this regard, conventional risk scores have an inadequate predictive value.

CoreValve implantation for severe aortic regurgitation: a multicentre registry.

DE SERVI, STEFANO;
2014

Abstract

AIMS: We sought to evaluate the outcome of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with the CoreValve Revalving System (CRS-TAVR) in inoperable patients presenting with severe aortic regurgitation (AR), compared to in patients treated for severe native aortic stenosis (AS). From October 2008 to January 2013, 1,557 consecutive patients undergoing CRS-TAVR, of whom 26 (1.6%) presented with AR, were prospectively followed. Compared with patients with AS, patients with AR were significantly younger (mean age 73±10 vs. 82±6, p=0.02), more frequently in NYHA Class III/IV (95% vs. 73%, p=0.01) and had a higher incidence of severe pulmonary hypertension (sPAP >60 mmHg, 31% vs. 10%, p=0.007). Log EuroSCORE and STS score were similar. VARC-2-defined device success was lower in the AR group (79% vs. 96%, p=0.006). At one month, patients treated for AR had a higher overall mortality (23% vs. 5.9%; OR 4.22 [3.03-8.28], p<0.001) and cardiac mortality (15.3% vs. 4%, OR 4.01 [2.40-7.66], p<0.001). Results were consistent at 12 months: overall mortality (31% vs. 19%, HR 2.1 [1.5-4.41], p<0.001) and cardiac mortality (19.2% vs. 6%, HR 3.1 [2.09-8.22], p<0.001). CRS-TAVR for AR is associated with a significantly higher mortality compared to CRS-TAVR for AS. Considering the ominous prognosis of these patients when treated medically, TAVR may be a reasonable choice in selected patients. In this regard, conventional risk scores have an inadequate predictive value.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/11571/981040
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact