Search

Patients with non-paradoxical low-flow–low-gradient (LFLG) aortic stenosis (AS) are at increased surgical risk, and thus, they may particularly benefit from transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). However, data on this issue are still limited and based on the results with older-generation transcatheter heart valves (THVs). The aim of this study was to investigate early and mid-term outcome of TAVR with newer-generation THVs in the setting of LFLG AS. Data for the present analysis were gathered from the OBSERVANT II dataset, a national Italian observational, prospective, multicenter cohort study that enrolled 2,989 consecutive AS patients who underwent TAVR at 30 Italian centers between December 2016 and September 2018, using newer-generation THVs. Overall, 420 patients with LVEF ≤50% and mean aortic gradient n = 389) with those who underwent surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR, n = 401) from the OBSERVANT I study. Patients with LFLG AS undergoing TAVR were old (mean age, 80.8 ± 6.7 years) and with increased operative risk (mean EuroSCORE II, 11.5 ± 10.2%). VARC-3 device success was 83.3% with 7.6% of moderate/severe paravalvular leak. Thirty-day mortality was 3.1%. One-year all-cause mortality was 17.4%, and the composite endpoint was 34.8%. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (HR 1.78) and EuroSCORE II (HR 1.02) were independent predictors of 1-year mortality, while diabetes (HR 1.53) and class NYHA IV (HR 2.38) were independent predictors of 1-year mortality or CHF. Compared with LFLG AS treated with SAVR, TAVR patients had a higher rate of major vascular complications and permanent pacemaker, while SAVR patients underwent more frequently to blood transfusion, cardiogenic shock, AKI, and MI. However, 30-day and 1-year outcomes were similar between groups. Patients with non-paradoxical LFLG AS treated by TAVR were older and with higher surgical risk compared with SAVR patients. Notwithstanding, TAVR was safe and effective with a similar outcome to SAVR at both early and mid-term.

Background: Data reflecting the benefit of procedural improvements in real-world transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) practice are sparse. Aims: To compare outcomes and trends of two TAVI eras from real Italian practice. Methods: A total of 1811 and 2939 TAVI patients enrolled in the national, prospective OBSERVANT and OBSERVANT II studies in 2010–2012 and 2016–2018, respectively, were compared in a cohort study. Outcomes were adjusted using inverse propensity of treatment weighting and propensity score matching. Results: The median age (83.0 (79.0–86.0) vs. 83.0 (79.0–86.0)) and EuroSCORE II (5.2 (3.2–7.7) vs. 5.1 (3.1–8.1)) of OBSERVANT and OBSERVANT II patients were similar. At 1 year, patients of the OBSERVANT II study had a significantly lower risk of all-cause death (10.6% vs. 16.3%, Hazard Ratio (HR) 0.63 (95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.52–0.76)) and rehospitalization for heart failure (HF) (14.3% vs. 19.5%, Sub-distribution HR 0.71 (95%CI 0.60–0.84)), whereas rates of stroke (3.1% vs. 3.6%) and permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) (16.6% vs. 18.0%) were comparable between study groups. Conclusions: Age and risk profile among patients undergoing TAVI in Italy remained substantially unchanged between the 2010–2012 and 2016–2018 time periods. After adjustment, patients undergoing TAVI in the most recent era had lower risk of all-cause death and rehospitalization for HF at 1 year, whereas rates of stroke and PPI did not differ significantly.

The superiority of transcatheter (TAVR) over surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for severe aortic stenosis (AS) has not been fully demonstrated in a real-world setting. This prospective study included 5706 AS patients who underwent SAVR from 2010 to 2012 and 2989 AS patients who underwent TAVR from 2017 to 2018 from the prospective multicenter observational studies OBSERVANT I and II. Early adverse events as well as all-cause mortality, major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs), and hospital readmission due to heart failure at 1-year were investigated. Among 1008 propensity score matched pairs, TAVR was associated with significantly lower 30-day mortality (1.8 vs. 3.5%, p = 0.020), stroke (0.8 vs. 2.3%, p = 0.005), and acute kidney injury (0.6 vs. 8.2%, p &lt, 0.001) compared to SAVR. Moderate-to-severe paravalvular regurgitation (5.9 vs. 2.0%, p &lt, 0.001) and permanent pacemaker implantation (13.8 vs. 3.3%, p &lt, 0.001) were more frequent after TAVR. At 1-year, TAVR was associated with lower risk of all-cause mortality (7.9 vs. 11.5%, p = 0.006), MACCE (12.0 vs. 15.8%, p = 0.011), readmission due to heart failure (10.8 vs. 15.9%, p &lt, 0.001), and stroke (3.2 vs. 5.1%, p = 0.033) compared to SAVR. TAVR reduced 1-year mortality in the subgroups of patients aged 80 years or older (HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.33–0.71), in females (HR 0.57, 0.38–0.85), and among patients with EuroSCORE II ≥ 4.0% (HR 0.48, 95% CI 0.32–0.71). In a real-world setting, TAVR using new-generation devices was associated with lower rates of adverse events up to 1-year follow-up compared to SAVR.

Introduction: Data on the early and late outcome following transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in obese patients are limited. We investigated whether TAVI may be superior to SAVR in obese patients. Material and methods: Obese patients (body mass index ≥ 30 kg/m²) who underwent either SAVR or TAVI were identified from the nationwide OBSERVANT registry, and their in-hospital and long-term outcomes were analysed. Propensity score matching was employed to identify two cohorts with similar baseline characteristics. Results: The propensity score matching provided 142 pairs balanced in terms of baseline risk factors. In-hospital and 30-day mortality did not differ between SAVR and TAVI obese patients (4.6% vs. 3.3%, p = 0.56, and 5.2% vs. 3.2%, p = 0.41, respectively). Obese SAVR patients experienced a higher rate of renal failure (12.4% vs. 3.6%, p = 0.0105) and blood transfusion requirement (60.3% vs. 25.7%, p < 0.0001) in comparison with TAVI patients. A higher rate of permanent pacemaker implantation (14.4% vs. 3.6%, p = 0.0018), and major vascular injuries (7.4% vs. 0%, p = 0.0044) occurred in the TAVI group. Five-year survival was higher in the SAVR group compared to the TAVI patient cohort (p = 0.0046), with survival estimates at 1, 3 and 5 years of 88.0%, 80.3%, 71.8% for patients undergoing SAVR, and 85.2%, 69.0%, 52.8% for those subjected to TAVI procedures. Conclusions: In obese patients, both SAVR and TAVI are valid treatment options, although in the long term SAVR exhibited higher survival rates.

Background To assess clinical outcomes of patients with concomitant severe aortic stenosis (AS) and coronary artery disease (CAD) who underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Methods Data were extracted from the multicenter OBSERVANT study. For the purposes of the present analysis, we included only patients with established stable CAD meeting any of the following inclusion criteria: 1) TAVI patients with CAD undergoing staged PCI or TAVI and PCI in the same session; 2) SAVR patients undergoing combined SAVR and CABG in the same session. Results After propensity-score matching, a total of 472 patients (236 per group) were identified. Among TAVI patients, PCI was performed prior to the procedure in 217 patients (92.0%), whereas concomitant TAVI and PCI were performed in 19 patients (8.0%). At 3-year, there was no difference in survival between the two groups (KM estimate of freedom from death for SAVR and TAVI patients of 0.742 and 0.650, respectively; log-rank p-value of 0.105). The rate of MACCE was comparable between the two groups (KM estimate of freedom from MACCE for SAVR and TAVI patients of 0.683 and 0.582, respectively; log-rank p-value of 0.115). Conclusions In patients with associated severe AS and CAD, percutaneous treatment (TAVR and staged or concomitant PCI) was comparable to surgical treatment (SAVR and concomitant CABG) with respect to the early and mid-term risk of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, stroke and unplanned revascularization.

Objectives: This study aimed to compare differences in patient characteristics and clinical outcomes of nonagenarians undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) versus patients younger than 90 years of age and to test the predictive accuracy of the logistic EuroSCORE (European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation), the EuroSCORE II, and the STS-PROM (Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality) for mortality after TAVR in nonagenarians. Background: The prevalence of severe aortic valve stenosis is increasing due to the rising life expectancy. However, there are limited data evaluating outcomes in patients older than 90 years of age. Moreover, the predictive accuracy of risk scores for mortality has not been evaluated in nonagenarian patients undergoing transfemoral TAVR. Methods: The CENTER (Cerebrovascular EveNts in Patients Undergoing TranscathetER Aortic Valve Implantation) collaboration (N = 12,381) is an international collaboration consisting of 3 national registries, 6 local or multicenter registries, and 1 prospective clinical study, selected through a systematic online search. The primary endpoint of this study was the difference in 30-day all-cause mortality and stroke after TAVR in nonagenarians versus patients younger than 90 years of age. Secondary endpoints included differences in baseline characteristics, in-hospital outcomes, and the differences in predictive accuracy of the logistic EuroSCORE, the EuroSCORE II, and STS-PROM. Results: A total of 882 nonagenarians and 11,499 patients younger than 90 years of age undergoing transfemoral TAVR between 2007 and 2018 were included. Nonagenarians had considerably fewer comorbidities than their counterparts. Nevertheless, rates of 30-day mortality (9.9% vs. 5.4%; relative risk [RR]: 1.8; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.4 to 2.3; p = 0.001), in-hospital stroke (3.0% vs. 1.9%; RR: 1.5; 95% CI: 1.0 to 2.3; p = 0.04), major or life-threatening bleeding (8.1% vs. 5.5%; RR: 1.6; 95% CI: 1.1 to 2.2; p = 0.004), and new-onset atrial fibrillation (7.9% vs. 5.2%; RR: 1.6; 95% CI: 1.1 to 2.2; p = 0.01) were higher in nonagenarians. The STS-PROM adequately estimated mortality in nonagenarians, with an observed-expected mortality ratio of 1.0. Conclusions: In this large, global, patient-level analysis, mortality after transfemoral TAVR was 2-fold higher in nonagenarians compared with patients younger than 90 years of age, despite the lower prevalence of baseline comorbidities. Moreover, nonagenarians had a higher risk of in-hospital stroke, major or life-threatening bleeding, and new-onset atrial fibrillation. The STS-PROM was the only surgical risk score that accurately predicted the risk of mortality in nonagenarians.

Background: The OBSERVANT study (Observational Study of Effectiveness of SAVR–TAVI Procedures for Severe Aortic Stenosis Treatment) showed that mortality at 1 year is similar after transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for real-world propensity-matched patients with aortic stenosis at low and intermediate risk. We report the 5-year outcomes of the Italian OBSERVANT study. Methods and Results: The unadjusted enrolled population (N=7618) between December 2010 and June 2012 included 5707 patients on SAVR and 1911 patients on TAVR. The propensity score method was applied to select 2 groups with similar baseline characteristics. All outcomes were adjudicated through a linkage with administrative databases. The primary end points of this analysis were death from any cause and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events at 5 years. The matched population had a total of 1300 patients (650 per group). The propensity score method generated a low and intermediate-risk population (mean logistic EuroSCORE 2: 5.1±6.2% versus 4.9±5.1%, SAVR versus transfemoral TAVR; P =0.485). At 5 years, the rate of 5 death from any cause was 35.8% in the surgical group and 48.3% in the transcatheter group (hazard ratio, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.12–1.69; P =0.002). Similarly, TAVR was associated with an increased risk of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events as compared with SAVR (42.5% versus 54.0%; hazard ratio, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.11–1.63; P =0.003). The cumulative incidence of cerebrovascular events, myocardial infarction, and coronary revascularization were similar in the study groups at 5 years. Conclusions: The present results suggest that at 5 years, in a real-world population with severe aortic stenosis and at low and intermediate risk, suggest that SAVR is associated in with lower mortality and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events rates than transfemoral TAVR performed using first-generation devices. These data need to be confirmed in randomized trials using new-generation TAVR devices.

Background: The OBSERVANT study (Observational Study of Effectiveness of SAVR–TAVI Procedures for Severe Aortic Stenosis Treatment) showed that mortality at 1 year is similar after transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for real-world propensity-matched patients with aortic stenosis at low and intermediate risk. We report the 5-year outcomes of the Italian OBSERVANT study. Methods and Results: The unadjusted enrolled population (N=7618) between December 2010 and June 2012 included 5707 patients on SAVR and 1911 patients on TAVR. The propensity score method was applied to select 2 groups with similar baseline characteristics. All outcomes were adjudicated through a linkage with administrative databases. The primary end points of this analysis were death from any cause and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events at 5 years. The matched population had a total of 1300 patients (650 per group). The propensity score method generated a low and intermediate-risk population (mean logistic EuroSCORE 2: 5.1±6.2% versus 4.9±5.1%, SAVR versus transfemoral TAVR; P=0.485). At 5 years, the rate of 5 death from any cause was 35.8% in the surgical group and 48.3% in the transcatheter group (hazard ratio, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.12–1.69; P=0.002). Similarly, TAVR was associated with an increased risk of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events as compared with SAVR (42.5% versus 54.0%; hazard ratio, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.11–1.63; P=0.003). The cumulative incidence of cerebrovascular events, myocardial infarction, and coronary revascularization were similar in the study groups at 5 years. Conclusions: The present results suggest that at 5 years, in a real-world population with severe aortic stenosis and at low and intermediate risk, suggest that SAVR is associated in with lower mortality and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events rates than transfemoral TAVR performed using first-generation devices. These data need to be confirmed in randomized trials using new-generation TAVR devices.

OBJECTIVES We aimed to analyze the baseline features and clinical outcomes of patients younger than 80 years undergoing transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) enrolled in the OBservational Study of Effectiveness of SAVR-TAVR procedures for severe Aortic steNosis Treatment (OBSERVANT) real-world study, focusing on variables guiding Heart Team decision toward TAVI. BACKGROUND Patients treated with TAVI, independently of surgical risk score, are mostly older than 80 years. METHODS OBSERVANT is a multicenter, observational, prospective cohort study that enrolled patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis (AS) who underwent SAVR or TAVI from December 2010 to June 2012 in 93 Italian participating hospitals. For this analysis, baseline characteristics, therapeutic approach and outcomes up to 5 years of follow-up of 4,801 patients under 80 years of age were collected. Patients were stratified by age classes (

Objective To evaluate outcomes of monitored anesthesia care (MAC) compared with general anesthesia (GA) in patients undergoing transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Design Secondary analysis from the observational and prospective OBSERVANT (OBservational Study of Effectiveness of avR–taVi procedures for severe Aortic steNosis Treatment) study. Setting Multicenter study, including Italian hospitals performing TAVR interventions. Participants One thousand four hundred ninety-four patients with severe and symptomatic aortic stenosis. Interventions Transfemoral TAVR under general or local anesthesia. Measurements and Main Results A propensity score procedure was applied, and 310 pairs were matched with similar baseline characteristics (EuroSCORE II: local anesthesia 6.6±5.9% v general anesthesia 7.0±7.7%, p = 0.430). MAC was associated with similar 30-day mortality compared with GA (3.9% v 4.8%, p = 0.564). TAVR was performed under MAC without any increased risk of other adverse events. The risk of paravalvular regurgitation≥mild was similar between the study groups (MAC 49.5% v general anesthesia 57.0%, p = 0.858). Two patients receiving on MAC had severe paravalvular regurgitation, whereas this complication was not observed after GA. Permanent pacemaker implantation was 19.1% in the MAC group v 14.8% in the GA group (p = 0.168). Mean intensive care unit stay was 3.5 days for the GA group v 2.9 days for the MAC group (p = 0.086). A similar 3-year survival rate was observed (MAC 69.4% v GA 69.9%, p = 0.966). Conclusions Transfemoral TAVR can be performed under MAC with similar immediate and late outcomes as compared with GA. A possible risk of severe paravalvular regurgitation and pacemaker implantation with TAVR under MAC requires further investigation.

Aims: No data exists on inter-institutional differences in terms of adherence to international guidelines regarding the discontinuation of antithrombotics and rates of severe bleeding in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Methods and results: This is an analysis of 7118 patients from the prospective multicentre European CABG (E-CABG) registry who underwent isolated CABG in 15 European centres. Preoperative pause of P2Y12 receptor antagonists shorter than that suggested by the 2017 ESC guidelines (overall 11.6%) ranged from 0.7% to 24.8% between centres (adjusted P

Background: To assess clinical outcomes of patients with concomitant severe aortic stenosis (AS) and coronary artery disease (CAD) who underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Methods: Data were extracted from the multicenter OBSERVANT study. For the purposes of the present analysis, we included only patients with established stable CAD meeting any of the following inclusion criteria: 1) TAVI patients with CAD undergoing staged PCI or TAVI and PCI in the same session; 2) SAVR patients undergoing combined SAVR and CABG in the same session. Results: After propensity-score matching, a total of 472 patients (236 per group) were identified. Among TAVI patients, PCI was performed prior to the procedure in 217 patients (92.0%), whereas concomitant TAVI and PCI were performed in 19 patients (8.0%). At 3-year, there was no difference in survival between the two groups (KM estimate of freedom from death for SAVR and TAVI patients of 0.742 and 0.650, respectively; log-rank p-value of 0.105). The rate of MACCE was comparable between the two groups (KM estimate of freedom from MACCE for SAVR and TAVI patients of 0.683 and 0.582, respectively; log-rank p-value of 0.115). Conclusions: In patients with associated severe AS and CAD, percutaneous treatment (TAVR and staged or concomitant PCI) was comparable to surgical treatment (SAVR and concomitant CABG) with respect to the early and mid-term risk of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, stroke and unplanned revascularization.

Objectives: We compared the outcome of anaemic patients undergoing transcatheter (TAVI) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for severe aortic valve stenosis. Methods: Anaemic patients (haemoglobin

Background— The proven efficacy of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in high-risk patients is leading to the expansion of its indications toward lower-risk patients. However, this shift is not supported by meaningful evidence of its benefit over surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). This analysis aims to describe outcomes of TAVI versus SAVR in low-risk patients. Methods and Results— We compared the outcome after TAVI and SAVR of low-risk patients (European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation II [EuroSCORE II] P =0.82). Cardiac tamponade, permanent pacemaker implantation, major vascular damage, and moderate-to-severe paravalvular regurgitation were significantly more frequent after TAVI compared with SAVR. Stroke rates were equal in the study groups. SAVR was associated with higher risk of cardiogenic shock, severe bleeding, and acute kidney injury. At 3 years, survival was 83.4% after SAVR and 72.0% after TAVI ( P =0.0015), whereas freedom from major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events was 80.9% after SAVR and 67.3% after TAVI ( P Conclusions— In patients with low operative risk, significantly better 3-year survival and freedom from major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events were observed after SAVR compared with TAVI. Further studies on new-generation valve prostheses are necessary before expanding indications of TAVI toward lower-risk patients.

Background There are scarce data on outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients with renal failure. Methods We evaluated the impact of renal failure on outcomes after TAVI and SAVR and compared the results of these procedures in patients with chronic kidney disease stages 3b to 5 from the Observational Study of Effectiveness of AVR-TAVI Procedures for Severe Aortic Stenosis Treatment (OBSERVANT) study. Results Chronic kidney disease (CKD) stages 3b to 5 was associated with an increased risk of mortality after either TAVI or SAVR compared with CKD stages 1 to 3a. Among 170 propensity score–matched pairs with CKD stages 3b to 5, patients who underwent TAVI had a significantly higher rate of permanent pacemaker implantation, vascular damage, and mild to moderate paravalvular regurgitation, and tended to have a higher 30-day mortality (7.1% versus 2.9%; p = 0.09). Thirty-day mortality after transapical TAVI was 7.1%. SAVR had a significantly higher rate of blood transfusions, stroke, and acute kidney injury. At 2 years, patients undergoing TAVI had somewhat higher all-cause mortality (31.2% versus 23.4%; p = 0.118), major cardiac and cerebrovascular events (37.2% versus 31.0%; p = 0.270), and a lower risk of dialysis (12.4% versus 21.2%; p = 0.052) compared with SAVR. Conclusions CKD stages 3b to 5 increases the risk of mortality after TAVI and SAVR. In this subset of patients, SAVR was associated with somewhat better early and late survival. The risk of acute kidney injury was higher after SAVR. These findings suggest that CKD stages 3b to 5 does not contraindicate SAVR. Strategies to prevent severe acute kidney injury should be implemented with either SAVR or TAVI.

The aim of this study was to analyze procedural and postprocedural outcomes of patients aged ≥80 years treated by transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) as enrolled in the OBservational Study of Effectiveness of SAVR-TAVR procedures for severe Aortic steNosis Treatment (OBSERVANT) Study. TAVI is offered to patients with aortic stenosis judged inoperable or at high surgical risk. Nevertheless, it is common clinical practice to treat elderly (≥80 years) patients by TAVI regardless of surgical risk for traditional SAVR. OBSERVANT is a multicenter, observational, prospective cohort study that enrolled patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis who underwent SAVR or TAVI from December 2010 to June 2012 in 93 Italian participating hospitals. Information on demographic characteristics, health status before intervention, therapeutic approach, and intraprocedural and 30-day outcomes was collected. An administrative follow-up was set up to collect data on midterm to long-term outcomes. We reviewed baseline and procedural data of patients aged ≥80 years, looking for different early and late outcome after TAVI or SAVR. Patients treated by TAVI were sicker than SAVR because of higher rate of co-morbidities, advanced illness, frailty, and Logistic EuroSCORE. After propensity matching, early and midterm mortality were comparable between the 2 groups. However, patients treated by TAVI had higher rate of vascular complications (6.0% vs 0.5%; p0.0001), permanent pacemaker implantation (13.4% vs 3.7%; p0.0001), and paravalvular leak (8.9% vs 2.4%; p0.0001). Patients who underwent SAVR had more frequent bleedings needing transfusion (63.2% vs 34.5%; p0.0001) and acute kidney injury (9.6% vs 3.9%; p = 0.0010). In conclusion, patients aged ≥80 years treated by TAVI or SAVR had similar early and midterm mortality.

A few studies recently reported controversial results with transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TF-TAVR) versus transapical transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TA-TAVR), often without adequate adjusted analysis for baseline differences. Data on patients who underwent TF-TAVR and TA-TAVR from the Observational Study of Effectiveness of avR-tavI procedures for severe Aortic stenosis Treatment study were analyzed with propensity score 1-to-1 matching. From a cohort of 1,654 patients (1,419 patients underwent TF-TAVR and 235 patients underwent TA-TAVR), propensity score matching resulted in 199 pairs of patients with similar operative risk (EuroSCORE II: TF-TAVR 8.1 ± 7.1% vs TA-TAVR, 8.4 ± 7.3%, p = 0.713). Thirty-day mortality was 8.0% after TA-TAVR and 4.0% after TF-TAVR (p = 0.102). Postoperative rates of stroke (TA-TAVR, 2.0% vs TF-TAVR 1.0%, p = 0.414), cardiac tamponade (TA-TAVR, 4.1% vs TF-TAVR 1.5%, p = 0.131), permanent pacemaker implantation (TA-TAVR, 8.7% vs TF-TAVR 13.3%, p = 0.414), and infection (TA-TAVR, 6.7% vs TF-TAVR 3.6%, p = 0.180) were similar in the study groups but with an overall trend in favor of TF-TAVR. Higher rates of major vascular damage (7.2% vs 1.0%, p = 0.003) and moderate-to-severe paravalvular regurgitation (7.8% vs 5.2%, p = 0.008) were observed after TF-TAVR. On the contrary, TA-TAVR was associated with higher rates of red blood cell transfusion (50.0% vs 30.4%, p = 0.0002) and acute kidney injury (stages 1 to 3: 44.4% vs 21.9%, p

Risk stratification tools used in patients with severe aortic stenosis have been mostly derived from surgical series. Although specific predictors of early mortality with transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) have been identified, the prognostic impact of their combination is unexplored. We sought to develop a simple score, using preprocedural variables, for prediction of 30-day mortality after TAVR. A total of 1,878 patients from a national multicenter registry who underwent TAVR were randomly assigned in a 2:1 manner to development and validation data sets. Baseline characteristics of the 1,256 patients in the development data set were considered as candidate univariate predictors of 30-day mortality. A bootstrap multivariate logistic regression process was used to select correlates of 30-day mortality that were subsequently weighted and integrated into a scoring system. Seven variables were weighted proportionally to their respective odds ratios for 30-day mortality (glomerular filtration rate45 ml/min [6 points], critical preoperative state [5 points], New York Heart Association class IV [4 points], pulmonary hypertension [4 points], diabetes mellitus [4 points], previous balloon aortic valvuloplasty [3 points], and left ventricular ejection fraction40% [3 points]). The model showed good discrimination in both the development and validation data sets (C statistics 0.73 and 0.71, respectively). Compared with the logistic European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation in the validation data set, the model showed better discrimination (C statistic 0.71 vs 0.66), goodness of fit (Hosmer-Lemeshow p value 0.81 vs 0.00), and global accuracy (Brier score 0.054 vs 0.073). In conclusion, the risk of 30-day mortality after TAVR may be estimated by combining 7 baseline clinical variables into a simple risk scoring system.

ObjectiveDespite demonstration of the superior outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) versus optimal medical therapy for severe left ventricular systolic dysfunction, studies comparing TAVI and surgical aortic valve replacement (AVR) in this high-risk group have been lacking.MethodsWe performed propensity matching for age, gender, baseline comorbidities, previous interventions, priority at hospital admission, frailty score, New York Heart Association class, EuroSCORE, and associated cardiac diseases. Next, the 30-day mortality and procedure-related morbidity of 162 patients (81 TAVI vs 81 AVR) with severe left ventricular systolic dysfunction (ejection fraction ≤ 35%) were analyzed at the Italian National Institute of Health.ResultsThe 30-day mortality was comparable (P = .37) between the 2 groups. The incidence of periprocedural acute myocardial infarction (P = .55), low output state (P = .27), stroke (P = .36), and renal dysfunction (peak creatinine level, P = .57) was also similar between the 2 groups. TAVI resulted in significantly greater postprocedural permanent pacemaker implantation (P = .01) and AVR in more periprocedural transfusions (P

Background Few studies have yielded information on comparative effectiveness of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) versus surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) procedures in a real-world setting. The aim of this analysis is to describe procedural and post-procedural outcomes in a TAVI/SAVR intermediate risk propensity-matched population. Methods OBSERVANT is an observational prospective multicenter cohort study, enrolling AS patients undergoing SAVR or TAVI. Propensity score method was applied to analyze procedural and post-procedural outcomes. Pairs of patients with the same probability score were matched (caliper matching). Results The unadjusted enrolled population (N=2108) comprises 1383 SAVR patients, 602 transarterial-TAVI patients and 123 transapical-TAVI patients. Matched population comprised a total of 266 patients (133 patients for each group). A relatively low risk population was selected (mean logistic EuroSCORE 9.4±10.4% vs 8.9±9.5%, SAVR vs TAVI; p=0.650). Thirty-day mortality was 3.8% for both SAVR and TAVI (p=1.000). The incidence of stroke (1.5% SAVR and 0.0% TAVI; p=0.156) and myocardial infarction (0.8% SAVR and 0.8% TAVI; p=1.000) was not statistically different between groups, whereas a higher requirement for blood transfusion was reported across the surgical cohort (49.6% vs 36.1%; p=0.026). A higher incidence of major vascular damage (5.3% vs. 0.0%; p=0.007) and pacemaker implantation(0.8% vs 12.0%; p=0.001) were reported in the TAVI group. Conclusions Patients undergoing transcatheter and surgical treatment of severe aortic stenosis are still extremely distinct populations. In the relatively low-risk propensity-matched population analyzed, despite similar procedural and 30-day mortality, SAVR was associated with a higher risk for blood transfusion, whereas TAVI showed a significantly increased rate of vascular damage, permanent AV block and residual aortic valve regurgitation.

Aims No data exists on inter-institutional differences in terms of adherence to international guidelines regarding the discontinuation of antithrombotics and rates of severe bleeding in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Methods and results This is an analysis of 7118 patients from the prospective multicentre European CABG (E-CABG) registry who underwent isolated CABG in 15 European centres. Preoperative pause of P2Y12 receptor antagonists shorter than that suggested by the 2017 ESC guidelines (overall 11.6%) ranged from 0.7% to 24.8% between centres (adjusted P < 0.0001) and increased the rate of severe-massive bleeding [E-CABG bleeding grades 2-3, OR 1.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.27-2.17; Universal Definition of Perioperative Bleeding (UDPB) bleeding grades 3-4, OR 1.50, 95% CI 1.16-1.93]. The incidence of resternotomy for bleeding (overall 2.6%) ranged from 0% to 6.9% (adjusted P < 0.0001), and surgical site bleeding (overall 59.6%) ranged from 0% to 84.6% (adjusted P = 0.003). The rate of the UDPB bleeding grades 3-4 (overall 8.4%) ranged from 3.7% to 22.3% (P < 0.0001), and of the E-CABG bleeding grades 2-3 (overall 6.5%) ranged from 0.4% to 16.4% between centres (P < 0.0001). Resternotomy for bleeding (adjusted OR 5.04, 95% CI 2.85-8.92), UDPB bleeding grades 3-4 (adjusted OR 6.61, 95% CI 4.42-9.88), and E-CABG bleeding grades 2-3 (adjusted OR 8.71, 95% CI 5.76-13.15) were associated with an increased risk of hospital/30-day mortality. Conclusions Adherence to the current guidelines on the early discontinuation of P2Y12 receptor antagonists is of utmost importance to reduce excessive bleeding and early mortality after CABG. Inter-institutional variation should be considered for a correct interpretation of the results in multicentre studies evaluating perioperative bleeding and use of blood products.

The impact of thrombocytopenia on postoperative bleeding and other major adverse events after cardiac surgery is unclear. This issue was investigated in a series of patients who underwent isolated coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) from the prospective, multicenter E-CABG registry. Preoperative thrombocytopenia was defined as preoperative platelet count

Background: Despite the widespread use of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), the role of sex on outcome after TAVI or surgical aortic valve replacement (AVR) has been poorly investigated. We investigated the impact of sex on outcome after TAVI or AVR. Methods: There were 2108 patients undergoing TAVI or AVR who were enrolled in the Italian Observational Multicenter Registry (OBSERVANT). Thirty-day mortality, major periprocedural morbidity, and transprosthetic gradients were stratified by sex according to interventions. Results: Female AVR patients showed a worse risk profile compared with male AVR patients, given the higher mean age, prevalence of frailty score of 2 or higher, New York Heart Association class of 3 or higher, lower body weight, and preoperative hemoglobin level (P ≤.02). Similarly, female TAVI patients had a different risk profile than male TAVI patients, given a higher age and a lower body weight and preoperative hemoglobin level (P ≤.005), but with a similar New York Heart Association class, frailty score, EuroSCORE (P = NS), a better left ventricular ejection fraction and a lower prevalence of left ventricular ejection fraction less than 30%, porcelain aorta, renal dysfunction, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, arteriopathy, and previous cardiovascular surgery or percutaneous coronary intervention (P ≤.01). Women showed a smaller aortic annulus than men in both populations (P