Search

Introduction: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has put tremendous pressure on healthcare systems. Most transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) centres have adopted different triage systems and procedural strategies to serve highest-risk patients first and to minimise the burden on hospital logistics and personnel. We therefore assessed the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on patient selection, type of anaesthesia and outcomes after TAVI. Methods: We used data from the Netherlands Heart Registration to examine all patients who underwent TAVI between March 2020 and July 2020 (COVID cohort), and between March 2019 and July 2019 (pre-COVID cohort). We compared patient characteristics, procedural characteristics and clinical outcomes. Results: We examined 2131 patients who underwent TAVI (1020 patients in COVID cohort, 1111 patients in pre-COVID cohort). EuroSCORE II was comparable between cohorts (COVID 4.5 ± 4.0 vs pre-COVID 4.6 ± 4.2, p = 0.356). The number of TAVI procedures under general anaesthesia was lower in the COVID cohort (35.2% vs 46.5%, p < 0.001). Incidences of stroke (COVID 2.7% vs pre-COVID 1.7%, p = 0.134), major vascular complications (2.3% vs 3.4%, p = 0.170) and permanent pacemaker implantation (10.0% vs 9.4%, p = 0.634) did not differ between cohorts. Thirty-day and 150-day mortality were comparable (2.8% vs 2.2%, p = 0.359 and 5.2% vs 5.2%, p = 0.993, respectively). Conclusions: During the COVID-19 pandemic, patient characteristics and outcomes after TAVI were not different than before the pandemic. This highlights the fact that TAVI procedures can be safely performed during the COVID-19 pandemic, without an increased risk of complications or mortality.

To assess current antithrombotic treatment strategies in the Netherlands in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). For every Dutch hospital performing TAVI (n = 14) an interventional cardiologist experienced in performing TAVI was interviewed concerning heparin, aspirin, thienopyridine and oral anticoagulation treatment in patients undergoing TAVI. The response rate was 100 %. In every centre, a protocol for antithrombotic treatment after TAVI was available. Aspirin was prescribed in all centres, concomitant clopidogrel was prescribed 13 of the 14 centres. Duration of concomitant clopidogrel was 3 months in over two-thirds of cases. In 2 centres, duration of concomitant clopidogrel was based upon type of prosthesis: 6 months versus 3 months for supra-annular and intra-annular prostheses, respectively. Leaning on a small basis of evidence and recommendations, the antithrombotic policy for patients undergoing TAVI is highly variable in the Netherlands. As a standardised regimen might further reduce haemorrhagic complications, large randomised clinical trials may help to establish the most appropriate approach.