Early Midterm Results After Valve Replacement With Contemporary Pericardial Prostheses for Severe Aortic Stenosis

Rubens, Fraser D.; Ngu, Janet M.C.; Malvea, Anahita; Samuels, Steven J.; Burwash, Ian G.

doi:10.1016/j.athoracsur.2020.08.029

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this study, the surgery group showed numerically higher mortality than that observed in previous studies [ 25 , 26 ]. We assumed that PSM might eliminate the low-risk patients and assign more elderly patients with poor comorbidities to the SAVR cohort than crude analyses.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 60%

Real-World Comparison of Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in the Era of Current-Generation Devices

Kyoung

Hwang

Chung

et al. 2023

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Few studies have reported comparisons of out-of-hospital clinical outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) in the era of current-generation valves that reflect the real-world situation. Data on patients with severe AS aged 65 years or older who underwent TAVR or SAVR between 2015 and 2018 were obtained from the National Health Insurance Service in Korea and clinical event rate was analyzed. The primary endpoint was all-cause death at 1 year. The cohort included a total of 4623 patients over 65 years of age, of whom 1269 (27.4%) were treated with TAVR. After 1:1 propensity score matching, 2120 patients were included in the study. TAVR was associated with reduced 1-year mortality (hazard ratio (HR): 0.55; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.42–0.70; p < 0.001). There was no difference between the groups in the incidence of ischemic stroke (HR: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.43–1.20; p = 0.21) and intracranial hemorrhage (HR: 1.10; p = 0.74). Permanent pacemaker insertion was observed more frequently in the TAVR cohort (9.4% vs. 2.5%, HR: 3.95, 95% CI: 2.57–6.09; p < 0.001), whereas repeat procedures were rare in both treatments (0.5% vs. 0.3%, p = 0.499). In the nation-wide real-world data analysis, TAVR with current-generation devices showed significantly lower 1-year mortality compared to SAVR in severe AS patients.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 60%