Search

Background: The impact of patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM) on long-term outcome after surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) is controversial. We sought to investigate the incidence of PPM and its impact on survival and reinterventions in a Finnish nationwide cohort., Methods: In the context of the nationwide FinnValve registry, we identified 4097 patients who underwent SAVR with a stented bioprosthesis with or without myocardial revascularization. The indexed effective orifice areas (EOAs) of surgical bioprostheses were calculated using literature-derived EOAs. PPM was graded as moderate (EOA 0.65-0.85 cm 2 /m 2 ) or severe (EOA ≤0.65 cm 2 /m 2 )., Results: The incidence of PPM was 46.0%. PPM was moderate in 38.8% (n = 1579) patients and severe in 7.2% (n = 297) patients. Time-trend analysis showed that the proportion of PPM decreased significantly from 74% in 2009 to 18% in 2017 (P < .01). Severe PPM was associated with increased 5-year all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.72; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07-2.76; P = .02). Severe PPM was not associated with an increased risk of repeat AVR (adjusted HR, 5.90; 95% CI, 0.95-36.5; P = .06). In a subanalysis of patients greater than or equal to 70 years of age, in comparison with no PPM, any PPM (adjusted HR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.05-1.45; P = .01) and severe PPM (HR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.17-2.00; P < 0.01) were associated with increased risk of 5-year mortality., Conclusions: Severe PPM after SAVR had a negative impact on survival. This study demonstrated that the effects of PPM should not be overlooked in elderly undergoing SAVR., (Copyright © 2021 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Recent surgical bovine pericardial prostheses are widely used despite limited data on their long-term durability., Methods: This is a comparative analysis of the outcome of the Trifecta (Abbott, Abbott Park, IL) and Perimount Magna Ease (Edwards, Lifesciences Corp, Irvine, CA) bioprostheses from the FinnValve registry, a Finnish nationwide database including patients with aortic stenosis who underwent transcatheter or surgical aortic valve replacement with a bioprosthesis between 2008 and 2017., Results: Overall 2216 patients (mean age, 74.1 ± 6.7 years; age <65 years, 8.9%; mean follow-up, 3.8 ± 2.1 years) received the Trifecta (851 patients) or the Perimount Magna Ease (1365 patients) bioprostheses. The rates of late mortality and prosthetic valve endocarditis were comparable in the study cohorts. At 7 years the Trifecta cohort had a significantly higher risk of repeat aortic valve replacement for structural valve failure (3.3% vs 0%; adjusted subdistribution hazard ratio, 2.224; 95% confidence interval, 1.044-4.737), repeat aortic valve replacement for any cause (3.6% vs 0.4%; adjusted subdistribution hazard ratio, 3.210; 95% confidence interval, 1.286-8.013), and repeat aortic valve replacement and/or prosthetic valve endocarditis (4.1% vs 0.9%; adjusted subdistribution hazard ratio, 3.210; 95% confidence interval, 1.286-8.013) compared with the Perimount Magna Ease cohort. Among 772 propensity score-matched pairs, at 7 years the Trifecta cohort had a higher risk of repeat aortic valve replacement for structural valve failure (5.7% vs 0%, P = .009)., Conclusions: The Trifecta aortic bioprosthesis is associated with a higher occurrence of repeat aortic valve replacement for structural valve failure compared with the Perimount Magna Ease bioprosthesis. Further comparative studies with echocardiographic data on structural valve deterioration and longer follow-up are needed to confirm these findings., (Copyright © 2020 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Increasing data support transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) as a valid option over surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in the treatment for severe aortic stenosis (AS) also in patients with low operative risk. However, limited data exist on the outcome of TAVI and SAVR in low-risk patients without coronary artery disease (CAD). The FinnValve registry included data on 6463 patients who underwent TAVI or SAVR with bioprosthesis between 2008 and 2017. Herein, we evaluated the outcome of low operative risk as defined by STS-PROM score <3% and absence of CAD, previous stroke and other relevant co-morbidities. Only patients who underwent TAVI with third-generation prostheses and SAVR with Perimount Magna Ease or Trifecta prostheses were included in this analysis. The primary endpoints were 30-day and 3-year all-cause mortality. Overall, 1,006 patients (175 TAVI patients and 831 SAVR patients) met the inclusion criteria of this analysis. Propensity score matching resulted in 140 pairs with similar baseline characteristics. Among these matched pairs, 30-day mortality was 2.1% in both TAVI and SAVR cohorts (p = 1.00) and 3-year mortality was 17.0% after TAVI and 14.6% after SAVR (p = 0.805). Lower rates of bleeding and atrial fibrillation, and shorter hospital stay were observed after TAVI. The need of new permanent pacemaker implantation and the incidence of early stroke did not differ between groups. In conclusion, TAVI using third-generation prostheses achieved similar early and mid-term survival compared with SAVR in low-risk patients without CAD., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Patients with severe aortic stenosis and heart failure have poor prognosis, and their outcomes may be suboptimal even after transcatheter (TAVR) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR)., Methods: This is an analysis of the nationwide FinnValve registry, which included patients who underwent primary TAVR or SAVR with a bioprothesis for aortic stenosis. We evaluated the outcome of patients with acute heart failure (AHF) within 60 days prior to TAVR or SAVR., Results: The prevalence of recent AHF was 11.4% (484 of 4241 patients) in the SAVR cohort and 11.3% (210 of 1855 patients) in the TAVR cohort. In the SAVR cohort, AHF was associated with lower 30-day survival (91.3% vs 97.0%; adjusted odds ratio 1.801, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.125-2.882) and 5-year survival (64.0% vs 81.2%; adjusted hazard ratio 1.482, 95% CI 1.207-1.821). SAVR patients with AHF had higher risk of major bleeding, need of mechanical circulatory support, acute kidney injury, prolonged hospital stay, and composite end-point (30-day mortality, stroke and/or acute kidney injury). Patients with AHF had a trend toward lower 30-day survival (crude rates 95.2% vs 97.9%; adjusted odds ratio 2.028, 95% CI 0.908-4.529) as well as significantly lower 5-year survival (crude rates 45.3% vs 58.5%; adjusted hazard ratio 1.530, 95% CI 1.185-1.976) also after TAVR. AHF increased the risk of acute kidney injury, prolonged hospital stay, and composite end-point after TAVR., Conclusions: Recent AHF is associated with increased risk of mortality and morbidity after SAVR and TAVR. These findings suggest that aortic stenosis patients should be referred for invasive treatment before the development of clinically evident heart failure., (Copyright © 2020 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To investigate the prognostic impact of red blood cell (RBC) transfusion on the outcome after transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR)., Design: Nationwide, retrospective multicenter study., Setting: Five University Hospitals., Participants: The nationwide FinnValve registry included data from 2,130 patients who underwent TAVR for aortic stenosis from 2008 to 2017. After excluding patients who underwent TAVR through nontransfemoral accesses, 1,818 patients were selected for this analysis., Intervention: TAVR with or without coronary revascularization., Measurements and Main Results: RBCs were transfused in 293 patients (16.1%). Time-trend analysis showed that the rates of RBC transfusion decreased significantly from 27.5% in 2012 to 10.0% in 2017 (p < 0.0001). Among 281 propensity score matched pairs, RBC transfusion was associated with higher 30-day mortality (7.1% v 0%, p < 0.0001), late mortality (at 5-year, 59.1% v 43.3%, p = 0.008), as well as increased risk of acute kidney injury (17.0% v 4.4%, p < 0.0001), renal replacement therapy (3.6% v 0.4, p < 0.0001) and prolonged hospital stay (mean, 8.5 v 4.7 days, p < 0.0001) compared with patients who did not receive blood transfusion. In the overall series, the risk of adverse events increased significantly with the increasing amount of transfused RBC units and when operation for excessive bleeding was necessary. Consistently with these findings, postoperative hemoglobin drop and nadir level were associated with higher early and late mortality., Conclusions: Patients who received blood transfusion after TAVR had an increased risk of early and late adverse events. These adverse effects were particularly evident with increasing amount of RBC transfusion and operations for excessive bleeding., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: The aim of this study was to compare the risk of prosthetic valve endocarditis (PVE) in patients with transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR)., Methods and Results: The FinnValve registry included data from 6,463 consecutive patients who underwent TAVR (n=2,130) or SAVR (n=4,333) with a bioprosthesis from 2008 to 2017. PVE was defined according to the modified Duke criteria. In this study, the incidence of PVE was 3.4/1,000 person-years after TAVR, and 2.9/1,000 person-years after SAVR. In competing risk analysis there was no significant difference in the risk of PVE between patients with TAVR and SAVR over an eight-year observational period. Male gender (HR 1.73, 95% CI: 1.04-2.89) and deep sternal wound infection or vascular access-site infection (HR 5.45, 95% CI: 2.24-13.2) were positively associated with PVE, but not type of procedure (HR 1.09, 95% CI: 0.59-2.01) in multivariate analysis. The mortality rate was 37.7% at one month and increased to 52.5% at one year. Surgical treatment was independently associated with decreased in-hospital mortality (HR 0.34, 95% CI: 0.21-0.61)., Conclusions: PVE is rare, and its risk is similar after TAVR and SAVR. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03385915. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03385915.

Aim: We investigated the outcomes of transcatheter (TAVR) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in Finland during the last decade. Methods: The nationwide FinnValve registry included data from 6463 patients who underwent TAVR or SAVR with a bioprosthesis for aortic stenosis from 2008 to 2017. Results: The annual number of treated patients increased three-fold during the study period. Thirty-day mortality declined from 4.8% to 1.2% for TAVR ( p  = .011) and from 4.1% to 1.8% for SAVR ( p  = .048). Two-year survival improved from 71.4% to 83.9% for TAVR ( p  < .001) and from 87.2% to 91.6% for SAVR ( p  = .006). During the study period, a significant reduction in moderate-to-severe paravalvular regurgitation was observed among TAVR patients and a reduction of the rate of acute kidney injury was observed among both SAVR and TAVR patients. Similarly, the rate of red blood cell transfusion and severe bleeding decreased significantly among SAVR and TAVR patients. Hospital stay declined from 10.4 ± 8.4 to 3.7 ± 3.4 days after TAVR ( p  < .001) and from 9.0 ± 5.9 to 7.8 ± 5.1 days after SAVR ( p  < .001). Conclusions: In Finland, the introduction of TAVR has led to an increase in the invasive treatment of severe aortic stenosis, which was accompanied by improved early outcomes after both SAVR and TAVR. Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03385915 Key Messages This study demonstrated that the introduction of transcatheter aortic valve replacement has led to its widespread use as an invasive treatment for severe aortic stenosis. Early and 2-year survival after transcatheter and surgical aortic valve replacement has improved during past decade. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement has fulfilled its previously unmet clinical needs and has surpassed surgical aortic valve replacement as the most common invasive treatment for aortic stenosis.