Search

Increased body mass index (BMI) is an established cardiovascular risk factor. The impact of high BMI on vascular and bleeding complications in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is not clarified. RISPEVA, a multicenter prospective database of patients undergoing TAVI stratified by BMI was used for this analysis. Patients were classified as normal or high BMI (obese and overweight) according to the World Health Organization criteria. A comparison of 30-day vascular and bleeding outcomes between groups was performed using propensity scores methods. A total of 3776 matched subjects for their baseline characteristics were included. Compared with normal BMI, high BMI patients had significantly 30-day greater risk of the composite of vascular or bleeding complications (11.1% vs 8.8%, OR: 1.28, 95% CI [1.02 to 1.61]; p = 0.03). Complications rates were higher in both obese (11.3%) and overweight (10.5%), as compared with normal weight patients (8.8%). By a landmark event analysis, the effect of high versus normal BMI on these complications appeared more pronounced within 7 days after the TAVI procedure. A significant linear association between increased BMI and vascular complications was observed at this time frame (p = 0.03). In conclusion, compared with normal BMI, both obese and overweight patients undergoing TAVI, experience increased rates of 30-day vascular and bleeding complications. These findings indicate that high BMI is an independent risk predictor of vascular and bleeding complications after TAVI., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Optimal antithrombotic management of patients with preexisting atrial fibrillation undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement is challenging given the need to balance the risk of bleeding and thromboembolism. We aimed to examine variation in care and association of antithrombotic therapies with 1-year outcomes of stroke, bleeding, and mortality in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement with concomitant atrial fibrillation in the United States., Methods: Patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement with preexisting atrial fibrillation from November 2011 through September 2015 in the Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Valve Therapy registry linked to the Medicare database were examined according to receipt of oral anticoagulants (OACs) or antiplatelet therapies (APTs) or a combination of these (OAC+APT) at discharge. To assess the associations of antithrombotic therapies with 1-year outcomes of stroke, bleeding, and mortality, we utilized inverse probability weighting for antithrombotic therapies and multivariable regression modeling to adjust for patient- and hospital-level variables., Results: In the 11 382 patients included in our study, 5833 (51.2%) were discharged on OAC+APT, 4786 (42.0%) on APT alone, and 763 (6.7%) on OAC alone. There was significant variability in discharge medication patterns, including 42% of patients discharged without OAC therapy. In adjusted analyses, the risk for all-cause mortality and stroke was not significantly different when comparing the 3 different antithrombotic strategies. Risk of bleeding was higher with OAC+APT compared with APT alone (hazard ratio, 1.16 [95% CI, 1.05–1.27]) and similar compared with OAC alone (hazard ratio, 1.17 [95% CI, 0.93–1.47])., Conclusions: There was significant variability in discharge medication patterns across US sites in patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement, including significant underuse of OAC in this high-risk cohort. The use of OAC+APT (versus OAC alone or APT alone) was not associated with a lower risk of stroke or mortality but was associated with increased risk of bleeding complications at 1 year compared with APT alone.

Background: Restricting transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) to centers based on volume thresholds alone can potentially create unintended disparities in healthcare access. We aimed to compare the influence of population density in state of Florida in regard to access to TAVR, TAVR utilization rates, and in-hospital mortality., Methods and Results: From 2011 to 2016, we used data from the Agency for Health Care Administration to calculate travel time and distance for each TAVR patient by comparing their home address to their TAVR facility ZIP code. Travel time and distance, TAVR rates, and mortality were compared across categories of low to high population density (population per square miles of land). Of the 6531 patients included, the mean (SD) age was 82 (9) years, 43% were female and 91% were White. Patients residing in the lowest category (<50/square miles) were younger, more likely to be men, and less likely to be a racial minority. Those residing in the lowest category density faced a longer unadjusted driving distances and times to their TAVR center (mean extra distance [miles]=43.5 [95% CI, 35.6-51.4]; P <0.001; mean extra time (minutes)=45.6 [95% CI, 38.3-52.9], P <0.001). This association persisted regardless of the methods used to determine population density. Excluding uninhabitable land, there was a 7-fold difference in TAVR utilization rates in the lowest versus highest population density regions (7 versus 45 per 100 000, P -for-pairwise-comparisons <0.001) and increase in TAVR in-hospital mortality (adjusted OR, 6.13 [95% CI, 1.97-19.1]; P <0.001)., Conclusions: Older patients living in rural counties in Florida face (1) significantly longer travel distances and times for TAVR, (2) lower TAVR utilization rates, and (3) higher adjusted TAVR mortality. These findings suggest that there are trade-offs between access to TAVR, its rate of utilization, and procedural mortality, all of which are important considerations when defining institutional and operator requirements for TAVR across the country.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence and outcomes of surgical bailout during transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR)., Background: The incidence and outcomes of unplanned conversion to open heart surgery, or "surgical bailout," during TAVR are not well characterized., Methods: Data from the Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology TVT (Transcatheter Valve Therapy) Registry was analyzed with respect to whether surgical bailout was performed during the index TAVR procedure. A Cox proportional hazards models was used to evaluate 1-year mortality and major adverse cardiovascular events., Results: Between November 2011 and September 2015, a total of 47,546 patients underwent TAVR. Surgical bailout during TAVR was performed in 1.17% of the cases (n = 558); the most frequent indications were valve dislodgement (22%), ventricular rupture (19.9%), and aortic valve annular rupture (14.2%). The incidence of surgical bailout significantly decreased over time (first tertile 1.25%, second tertile 1.43%, third tertile 1.04%; p = 0.0088). The 30-day and 1-year incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (54.6% vs. 7.4% [p < 0.0001] and 63.92% vs. 20.29% [p < 0.0001]) and all-cause mortality (50.00% vs. 4.98% [p < 0.0001] and 59.79% vs. 17.06% [p < 0.0001]) were significantly higher in those who underwent bailout. Independent predictors of surgical bailout included female sex, hemoglobin, left ventricular ejection fraction, nonelective cases, and nonfemoral access. Body surface area was the only independent predictor of survival after surgical bailout., Conclusions: In a large, nationally representative registry, the need for surgical bailout in patients undergoing TAVR is low, and its incidence has decreased over time. However, surgical bailout after TAVR is associated with poor outcomes, including 50% mortality at 30 days., (Copyright © 2019 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Fragmented care following elective surgery has been associated with poor outcomes. The association between fragmented care and outcomes in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is unknown. We examined patients who underwent TAVI from 2011 to 2015 at 374 sites in the STS/ACC TVT Registry, linked to Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services claims data. Fragmented care was defined as at least one readmission to a site other than the implanting TAVI center within 90 days after discharge, whereas continuous care was defined as readmission to the same implanting center. We compared adjusted 1-year outcomes, including stroke, bleeding, heart failure, mortality, and all-cause readmission in patients who received fragmented versus continuous care. Among 8,927 patients who received a TAVI between 2011 and 2015, 27.4% were readmitted within 90 days of discharge. Most patients received fragmented care (57.0%). Compared with the continuous care group, the fragmented care group was more likely to have severe chronic lung disease, cerebrovascular disease, and heart failure. States that had lower TAVI volume per Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services population had greater fragmentation. Patients living > 30 minutes from their TAVI center had an increased risk of fragmented care 1.07 (confidence interval [CI] 1.06 to 1.09, p < 0.001). After adjustment for comorbidities and procedural complications, fragmented care was associated with increased 1-year mortality (hazards ratio 1.18, CI 1.04 to 1.35, p = 0.010) and all-cause readmission (hazards ratio 1.08, CI 1.00 to 1.16, p = 0.051. In conclusion, fragmented readmission following TAVI is common, and is associated with increased 1-year mortality and readmission. Efforts to improve coordination of care may improve these outcomes and optimize long-term benefits yielded from TAVI., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose of Review: This review aims to describe the current evidence and consensus recommendations around antiplatelet and anticoagulant management in three common clinical scenarios in transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR): (1) recent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) preceding TAVR, (2) atrial fibrillation (AF) management in patients undergoing TAVR, and (3) bioprosthetic valve thrombosis management in TAVR., Recent Findings: Several small clinical trials have evaluated the use of single vs. dual antiplatelet therapy in patients undergoing TAVR, with most recent data favoring single antiplatelet therapy. There are several trials currently enrolling and in follow-up that evaluate the use of anticoagulants in combination with single and dual antiplatelet therapy for patients with AF undergoing TAVR, but as yet, there is no data to support a clear strategy. The use of DAPT after PCI continues to potentially shorten in patients undergoing elective PCI, thus prolonged DAPT may not be necessary post TAVR for the sake of PCI. Bioprosthetic valve thrombosis occurs more commonly than previously thought, but has uncertain clinical significance. In observational studies, antiplatelet therapy has little effect on bioprosthetic valve thrombosis, whereas anticoagulation is effective in both prevention and treatment of thrombosis. DAPT is currently recommended for 1-6 months for all patients without an indication for oral anticoagulation who undergo TAVR; however, there is a growing amount of evidence for single antiplatelet therapy. In the special situation of patients who have recently undergone PCI, the length of DAPT will depend on stent selection (BMS vs. DES), but may not be significantly prolonged unless the patient experienced an acute coronary syndrome prior to TAVR. There is no clear, optimal antithrombotic strategy for patients with AF who undergo TAVR, but avoidance of triple therapy by using OAC and low-dose ASA seems to be reasonable. OAC, not DAPT, is now known to prevent bioprosthetic valve thrombosis in TAVR and SAVR patients; however, the optimal therapy remains unknown. For patients who develop bioprosthetic valve thrombosis, OAC for 3-6 months, and repeat imaging is recommended to document resolution.

Purpose of Review: We will describe and define the current diagnosis, management, and potential therapy for low-flow aortic stenosis (AS) states, as well as summarize the available evidence underlying these recommendations., Recent Findings: Low-flow aortic stenosis syndromes have worse prognoses than traditionally defined normal flow severe aortic stenosis. In this setting, aortic valve replacement is the only therapy that improves outcomes. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement has an ever-expanding role in the treatment of aortic stenosis, and there is growing evidence that TAVR may be a preferred therapy for low-flow AS states. Aortic stenosis remains one of the most common valvular diseases requiring therapy. Low-flow AS represents up to 40% of all patients with AS and is associated with significant mortality. This condition requires further testing for appropriate diagnosis and treatment. Low-flow AS states have poor prognoses, thus AVR and especially TAVR have a growing role in treatment of this challenging subset of AS patients.

Background: Whether the introduction of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has affected hospitals' surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) and overall aortic valve replacement (AVR) case volumes and outcomes in the United States is unknown., Methods: We utilized data from The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) adult cardiac surgery database and the STS/American College of Cardiology (ACC) transcatheter valve therapies registry to examine SAVR and TAVR procedures. Temporal trends in total case volume (SAVR plus TAVR), and observed and risk-adjusted in-hospital mortality rates were assessed among low-risk cases (STS predicted risk of operative mortality < 4%), intermediate-risk cases (4% to 8%), and high-risk cases (> 8%). A contemporary control was provided by non-TAVR centers., Results: From 2008 to 2013, the total annual volume of AVR among 246 TAVR-performing hospitals increased from 19,578 to 33,004, with a 22% growth in SAVR volumes; non-TAVR hospital (n = 555) increases were more modest (16,563 to 19,134; 16% growth). Expanded volumes at TAVR hospitals included increased SAVR use in low- and intermediate-risk cases, and TAVR use in high-risk cases. In parallel, in-hospital mortality for all AVR procedures at TAVR sites declined from 3.4% to 2.9% (observed to expected [O:E] ratio 0.75 to 0.58, p < 0.001); the greatest declines were among intermediate- and high-risk SAVR patients. Owing to reduced SAVR mortality, TAVR centers experienced a significantly greater decline in O:E ratio for high-risk patient in-hospital mortality than non-TAVR centers (TAVR center O:E ratio, 0.81 to 0.61; non-TAVR center O:E ratio, 0.85 to 0.76; p < 0.001). After approval of TAVR for clinical use, a trend toward higher in-hospital mortality rates and O:E ratios for TAVR procedures was observed at new (but not at established) TAVR centers (O:E ratio, 0.41 to 0.67; p = 0.08)., Conclusions: Since the introduction of TAVR, the total volume of AVR procedures, including higher overall use of SAVR, at TAVR sites has significantly increased in the United States. Overall, in-hospital survival of patients undergoing treatment for aortic valve stenosis continues to improve., (Copyright © 2014 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background—Peripheral artery disease (PAD) is associated with increased cardiovascular mortality, and PAD risk factors overlap with those for aortic stenosis. The prevalence and outcomes associated with PAD in a population undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are unknown. Methods and Results—Using the Society of Thoracic Surgeons/Transcatheter Valve Therapy Registry linked to Medicare claims data, we identified patients ≥65 years old undergoing TAVR from 2011 to 2015. We calculated hazard ratios for 1-year adverse outcomes, including mortality, readmission, and bleeding, for patients with PAD compared with those without, adjusting for baseline characteristics and postprocedure medications. Analyses were performed separately by access site (transfemoral and nontransfemoral). Of 19 660 patients undergoing transfemoral TAVR, 4810 (24.5%) had PAD; 3730 (47.9%) of 7780 patients undergoing nontransfemoral TAVR had PAD. In both groups, patients with PAD were significantly more likely to have coronary and carotid artery diseases. At 1-year follow-up, patients with PAD undergoing TAVR via transfemoral access had a higher incidence of death (16.8% versus 14.4%; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.14; P=0.01), readmission (45.5% versus 42.1%; hazard ratio, 1.11; P<0.001), and bleeding (23.1% versus 19.7%; hazard ratio, 1.18; P<0.001) compared with patients without PAD. Patients with PAD undergoing TAVR via nontransfemoral access did not have significantly higher rates of 1-year mortality or readmission compared with patients without PAD. Conclusions—PAD is common among patients undergoing commercial TAVR via transfemoral and nontransfemoral access. Among patients undergoing transfemoral TAVR, PAD is associated with a higher incidence of 1-year adverse outcomes compared with absence of PAD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]