Transcatheter vs surgical aortic valve replacement in intermediate-surgical-risk patients with aortic stenosis: A propensity score–matched case-control study

Background Limited real-world data comparing outcomes after transcatheter (TAVR) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in intermediate-surgical-risk patients with aortic stenosis are available. Methods We identified 182 consecutive patients who underwent TAVR via the transfemoral (TF) route (November 2007–February 2011) and 111 moderate-to-high-risk historical case controls undergoing SAVR (August 2003–July 2008). Using propensity score matching based on clinical characteristics and surgical risk scores, we compared clinical outcomes in 111 matched patients. Valve Academic Research Consortium definitions were applied for end point adjudication. Results Baseline clinical characteristics, in particular Logistic European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation (23.2 ± 15.1 vs 24.4 ± 13.4) and Society of Thoracic Surgeons score (4.6 ± 2.3 vs 4.6 ± 2.6), were well matched between groups. Transfemoral TAVR was associated with more vascular complications (33.3% vs 0.9%, P < .001). On the other hand, acute kidney injury was more frequent after SAVR (8.1% vs 26.1%, P < .001). The rates of all-cause mortality in both TF-TAVR and SAVR groups was1.8% at 30 days ( P = 1.00) and 6.4% and 8.1%, respectively, at 1 year ( P = .80). At 1 year, the rate of cerebrovascular events was similar in the 2 groups (4.6% vs 9.1%, P = .19). Conclusions In this real-world cohort of intermediate-surgical-risk patients with aortic stenosis, TF-TAVR and SAVR were associated with similar mortality rates during follow-up but with a different spectrum of periprocedural complications. Furthermore, the survival rate after TF-TAVR in this group of elderly patients with intermediate Society of Thoracic Surgeons score was encouraging.