• Michael J Reardon, Neal S Kleiman, David H Adams, Steven J Yakubov, Joseph S Coselli, G Michael Deeb, Daniel O'Hair, Thomas G Gleason, Joon Sup Lee, James B Hermiller, Stan Chetcuti, John Heiser, William Merhi, George L Zorn, Peter Tadros, Newell Robinson, George Petrossian, G Chad Hughes, J Kevin Harrison, Brijeshwar Maini, Mubashir Mumtaz, John V Conte, Jon R Resar, Vicken Aharonian, Thomas Pfeffer, Jae K Oh, Jian Huang, and Jeffrey J Popma.
• Houston Methodist DeBakey Heart and Vascular Center, Houston, Texas.
• JAMA Cardiol. 2016 Nov 1; 1 (8): 945-949.

ImportanceTranscatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is now a well-accepted alternative to surgical AVR (SAVR) for patients with symptomatic aortic stenosis at increased operative risk. There is interest in whether TAVR would benefit patients at lower risk.ObjectiveThe Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality (STS PROM) has trended downward in US TAVR trials and the STS/American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Valve Therapy Registry. We hypothesized that if the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality (STS PROM) alone is sufficient to define decreased risk, the contribution to survival based on the degree of invasiveness of the TAVR procedure will decrease, making it more difficult to show improved survival and benefit over SAVR.Design, Setting, And ParticipantsThe CoreValve US Pivotal High Risk Trial was a multicenter, randomized, noninferiority trial. This retrospective analysis evaluated patients who underwent an attempted implant and had an STS PROM of 7% or less. The trial was performed at 45 US sites. Patients had severe aortic stenosis and were at increased surgical risk based on their STS PROM score and other risk factors.InterventionsEligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to self-expanding TAVR or to SAVR.Main Outcomes And MeasuresWe retrospectively stratified patients by the overall median STS PROM score (7%) and analyzed clinical outcomes and quality of life using the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire in patients with an STS PROM score of 7% or less.ResultsThe mean (SD) ages were 81.5 (7.6) years for the TAVR group and 81.2 years (6.6) for the SAVR group. A little more than half were men (57.9% in the TAVR group and 55.8% in the SAVR group). Of 750 patients who underwent attempted implantation, 383 (202 TAVR and 181 SAVR) had an STS PROM of 7% or less (median [interquartile range]: TAVR, 5.3% [4.3%-6.1%]; SAVR, 5.3% [4.1%-5.9%]). Two-year all-cause mortality for TAVR vs SAVR was 15.0% (95% CI, 8.9-10.0) vs 26.3% (95% CI, 19.7-33.0) (log rank P = .01). The 2-year rate of stroke for TAVR vs SAVR was 11.3% vs 15.1% (log rank P = .50). Quality of life by the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire summary score showed significant and equivalent increases in both groups at 2 years (mean [SD] TAVR, 20.0 [25.0]; SAVR, 18.6 [23.6]; P = .71; both P < .001 compared with baseline). Medical benefit, defined as alive with a Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire summary score of at least 60 and a less than 10-point decrease from baseline, was similar between groups at 2 years (TAVR, 51.0%; SAVR, 44.4%; P = .28).Conclusions And RelevanceSelf-expanding TAVR compares favorably with SAVR in high-risk patients with STS PROM scores traditionally considered intermediate risk.Trial RegistrationClinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01240902.

14 keywords...

hide…