Propensity-Matched Comparison of Evolut-R Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation With Surgery in Intermediate-Risk Patients (from the SURTAVI Trial).

Yakubov, Steven J; Van Mieghem, Nicolas M; Reardon, Michael J; Serruys, Patrick W; Gada, Hemal; Mumtaz, Mubashir; Deeb, G Michael; Kodali, Susheel; George, Isaac; Windecker, Stephan; Kleiman, Neal; Chetcuti, Stanley J; Sanchez, Carlos; Dauerman, Harold L; Li, Shuzhen; Popma, Jeffrey J (2020). Propensity-Matched Comparison of Evolut-R Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation With Surgery in Intermediate-Risk Patients (from the SURTAVI Trial). The American journal of cardiology, 131, pp. 82-90. Elsevier 10.1016/j.amjcard.2020.06.051

Text Propensity-matched comparison of Evolut-R Transcatheter aortic valve implantation with surgery in intermediate-risk patients.pdf - Published Version Restricted to registered users only Available under License Publisher holds Copyright. Download (337kB)

The SURTAVI trial demonstrated the noninferiority of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients with severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis at intermediate surgical risk. Most TAVI patients received an early generation device which is no longer commercially available. This analysis compares TAVI outcomes in patients that received the Evolut R valve to those of similar patients randomized to SAVR in the SURTAVI trial. The continued access study of SURTAVI (CAS) enrolled 290 patients. Of them, 252 were implanted with the 23, 26, or 29 mm Evolut R device. Propensity-score matching between this group and SURTAVI SAVR patients with annular diameter of 26 mm or less was based on 22 clinical characteristics, resulting in 197 matched pairs for analysis. The primary end point for comparison was the rate of all-cause mortality or disabling stroke at 1-year. The mean age for TAVI and SAVR patients in the propensity-score matched population was 79.1 years and STS-PROM was 4.0 ± 1.5% for TAVI and 3.9% ± 1.3% for SAVR. The rate of all-cause mortality or disabling stroke at 30-days significantly favored TAVI (0.5% vs 5.1%; p = 0.006). At 1-year TAVI was numerically favored (4.1% vs 8.2%; p = 0.082). In conclusion, compared with SAVR, TAVI using Evolut R had a favorable 30-day safety profile, significantly better hemodynamic performance, and a comparable 1-year rate of all-cause mortality or disabling stroke, suggesting this may be a preferred treatment for patients with severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis at intermediate surgical risk.

Interest & Impact

Downloads

1 since deposited on 30 Nov 2020
0 in the past 12 months

Citations

5 Citations in Web of Science ®
6 Citations in Scopus

Search

in Google Scholar™

Services

Actions (login required)

Edit item

Actions (login required)

Edit item