Search

Background Women account for a large proportion of patients treated with transcatheter aortic valve replacement, yet there remain conflicting reports about the effect of sex on outcomes. Moreover, the sex-specific prevalence and prognostic impact of frailty has not been systematically studied in the context of transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Methods and Results A preplanned analysis of the FRAILTY-AVR study (Frailty Aortic Valve Replacement) was performed to analyze the determinants of outcomes in older women and men undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement. FRAILTY-AVR was a multinational, prospective, observational cohort assembled at 14 institutions in North America and Europe from 2012 to 2017. Multivariable logistic regression models were stratified by sex and adjusted for covariates. Interaction between sex and each of these covariates was assessed. The primary outcome was 12-month mortality, and the secondary outcome was 1-month composite mortality or major morbidity. The cohort consisted of 340 women and 419 men. Women were older and had higher predicted risk of mortality. Women were more likely to have physical frailty traits, but not cognitive or psychosocial frailty traits, and global indices of frailty were similarly associated with adverse events regardless of sex. Women were more likely to require discharge to a rehabilitation facility, particularly those with physical frailty at baseline, although their functional status was similar to men at 12 months. The risk of 1-month mortality or major morbidity was greater in women, particularly those treated with larger prostheses. The risk of 12-month mortality was not greater in women, with the exception of those with pulmonary hypertension, in whom, there was a significant interaction for increased mortality. Conclusions The present study highlights sex-specific differences in older adults undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement and draws attention to the impact of physical frailty in women and their potential risk associated with oversized prostheses and pulmonary hypertension. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective(s): In light of the absence of patient and caregiver input in Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Cardiac Surgery guideline development, we conducted a scoping review to identify patient and caregiver preferences and prioritized outcomes related to perioperative care in cardiac surgery and its lifelong impact., Methods: Five electronic databases were searched to retrieve studies investigating patient or caregiver preferences and prioritized outcomes. Information was charted in duplicate and analyzed using descriptive statistics or thematic analysis. A patient and caregiver consultation workshop validated scoping review findings and solicited novel preferences and outcomes., Results: Of the 5292 articles retrieved, 43 met inclusion criteria. Most were from Europe (n = 19, 44%) or North America (n = 15, 35%) and qualitative and quantitative designs were represented in equal proportions. Fifty-two methods were used to obtain stakeholder preferences and prioritized outcomes, the majority being qualitative in nature (n = 32, 61%). Based on the collective preferences of 3772 patients and caregivers from the review and 17 from the consultation workshop, a total of 108 patient preferences, 32 caregiver preferences, and 19 prioritized outcomes were identified. The most commonly identified theme was "information and education." Improved quality of life was the most common patient-prioritized outcome, and all caregiver-prioritized outcomes were derived from the consultation workshop., Conclusions: Patient and caregiver preferences overlap with Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Cardiac Surgery recommendations targeting preoperative risk reduction strategies, prehabilitation, patient engagement technology, and intra- and postoperative strategies to reduce discomfort. To support clinical practice, future research should investigate associations with key surgical outcomes., (Copyright © 2021 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)