Search

Background: Patients with severe aortic stenosis and left ventricular systolic dysfunction have a poor prognosis, and this may result in inferior survival also after aortic valve replacement. The outcomes of transcatheter and surgical aortic valve replacement were investigated in this comparative analysis. Methods: The retrospective nationwide FinnValve registry included data on patients who underwent transcatheter or surgical aortic valve replacement with a bioprosthesis for severe aortic stenosis. Propensity score matching was performed to adjust the outcomes for baseline covariates of patients with reduced (≤ 50%) left ventricular ejection fraction. Results: Within the unselected, consecutive 6463 patients included in the registry, the prevalence of reduced ejection fraction was 20.8% (876 patients) in the surgical cohort and 27.7% (452 patients) in the transcatheter cohort. Reduced left ventricular ejection fraction was associated with decreased survival (adjusted hazards ratio 1.215, 95%CI 1.067–1.385) after a mean follow-up of 3.6 years. Among 255 propensity score matched pairs, 30-day mortality was 3.1% after transcatheter and 7.8% after surgical intervention (p = 0.038). One-year and 4-year survival were 87.5% and 65.9% after transcatheter intervention and 83.9% and 69.6% after surgical intervention (restricted mean survival time ratio, 1.002, 95%CI 0.929–1.080, p = 0.964), respectively. Conclusions: Reduced left ventricular ejection fraction was associated with increased morbidity and mortality after surgical and transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Thirty-day mortality was higher after surgery, but intermediate-term survival was comparable to transcatheter intervention. Trial registration: The FinnValve registry ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03385915.

Whether the subtype of atrial fibrillation affects outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis is unclear. The nationwide FinnValve registry included 2130 patients who underwent primary after transcatheter aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis during 2008–2017. Altogether, 281 (13.2%) patients had pre-existing paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, 651 (30.6%) had pre-existing non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation and 160 (7.5%) were diagnosed with new-onset atrial fibrillation during the index hospitalization. The median follow-up was 2.4 (interquartile range: 1.6–3.8) years. Paroxysmal atrial fibrillation did not affect 30-day or overall mortality (p-values >0.05). Non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation demonstrated an increased risk of overall mortality (hazard ratio: 1.61, 95% confidence interval: 1.35–1.92; p<0.001), but not 30-day mortality (p = 0.084). New-onset atrial fibrillation demonstrated significantly increased 30-day mortality (hazard ratio: 2.76, 95% confidence interval: 1.25–6.09; p = 0.010) and overall mortality (hazard ratio: 1.68, 95% confidence interval: 1.29–2.19; p<0.001). The incidence of early or late stroke did not differ between atrial fibrillation subtypes (p-values >0.05). In conclusion, non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation and new-onset atrial fibrillation are associated with increased mortality after transcatheter aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis, whereas paroxysmal atrial fibrillation has no effect on mortality. These findings suggest that non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation rather than paroxysmal atrial fibrillation may be associated with structural cardiac damage which is of prognostic significance in patients with aortic stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

Importance: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has been shown to be a valid alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients at high operative risk with severe aortic stenosis (AS). However, the evidence of the benefits and harms of TAVR in patients at low operative risk is still scarce. Objective: To compare the short-term and midterm outcomes after TAVR and SAVR in low-risk patients with AS. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective comparative effectiveness cohort study used data from the Nationwide Finnish Registry of Transcatheter and Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement for Aortic Valve Stenosis of patients at low operative risk who underwent TAVR or SAVR with a bioprosthesis for severe AS from January 1, 2008, to November 30, 2017. Low operative risk was defined as a Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality score less than 3% without other comorbidities of clinical relevance. One-to-one propensity score matching was performed to adjust for baseline covariates between the TAVR and SAVR cohorts. Exposures: Primary TAVR or SAVR with a bioprosthesis for AS with or without associated coronary revascularization. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were 30-day and 3-year survival. Results: Overall, 2841 patients (mean [SD] age, 74.0 [6.2] years; 1560 [54.9%] men) fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis; TAVR was performed in 325 patients and SAVR in 2516 patients. Propensity score matching produced 304 pairs with similar baseline characteristics. Third-generation devices were used in 263 patients (86.5%) who underwent TAVR. Among these matched pairs, 30-day mortality was 1.3% after TAVR and 3.6% after SAVR (P = .12). Three-year survival was similar in the study cohorts (TAVR, 85.7%; SAVR, 87.7%; P = .45). Interaction tests found no differences in terms of 3-year survival between the study cohorts in patients younger than vs older than 80 years or in patients who r

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 = 0.011) and from 4.1% to 1.8% for SAVR (p = 0.048). Two-year survival improved from 71.4% to 83.9% for TAVR (p < 0.001) and from 87.2% to 91.6% for SAVR (p = 0.006). 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 < 0.001) and from 9.0 ± 5.9 to 7.8 ± 5.1 days after SAVR (p < 0.001). 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.