Redo Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement After Prior Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement
Aortic stenosis treatment should consider risks and benefits for lifetime management. Although the feasibility of redo transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) remains unclear, concerns are emerging regarding reoperation after TAVR. The authors sought to define comparative risk of surgical aort...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | JACC. Cardiovascular interventions 2023-04, Vol.16 (8), p.942-953 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 953 |
---|---|
container_issue | 8 |
container_start_page | 942 |
container_title | JACC. Cardiovascular interventions |
container_volume | 16 |
creator | Hawkins, Robert B. Deeb, G. Michael Sukul, Devraj Patel, Himanshu J. Gualano, Sarah K. Chetcuti, Stanley J. Grossman, P. Michael Ailawadi, Gorav Fukuhara, Shinichi |
description | Aortic stenosis treatment should consider risks and benefits for lifetime management. Although the feasibility of redo transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) remains unclear, concerns are emerging regarding reoperation after TAVR.
The authors sought to define comparative risk of surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) after prior TAVR or SAVR.
Data on patients undergoing bioprosthetic SAVR after TAVR and/or SAVR were extracted from the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Database (2011-2021). Overall and isolated SAVR cohorts were analyzed. The primary outcome was operative mortality. Risk adjustment using hierarchical logistic regression as well as propensity score matching for isolated SAVR cases were performed.
Of 31,106 SAVR patients, 1,126 had prior TAVR (TAVR-SAVR), 674 had prior SAVR and TAVR (SAVR-TAVR-SAVR), and 29,306 had prior SAVR (SAVR-SAVR). Yearly rates of TAVR-SAVR and SAVR-TAVR-SAVR increased over time, whereas SAVR-SAVR was stable. The TAVR-SAVR patients were older, with higher acuity, and with greater comorbidities than other cohorts. The unadjusted operative mortality was highest in the TAVR-SAVR group (17% vs 12% vs 9%, respectively; P < 0.001). Compared with SAVR-SAVR, risk-adjusted operative mortality was significantly higher for TAVR-SAVR (OR: 1.53; P = 0.004), but not SAVR-TAVR-SAVR (OR: 1.02; P = 0.927). After propensity score matching, operative mortality of isolated SAVR was 1.74 times higher for TAVR-SAVR than SAVR-SAVR patients (P = 0.020).
The number of post-TAVR reoperations is increasing and represent a high-risk population. Yet even in isolated SAVR cases, SAVR after TAVR is independently associated with increased risk of mortality. Patients with life expectancy beyond a TAVR valve and unsuitable anatomy for redo-TAVR should consider a SAVR-first approach.
[Display omitted] |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.jcin.2023.03.015 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2806995572</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S1936879823005745</els_id><sourcerecordid>2806995572</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-4cedc4726562933c3e8262bae09a45584953bb7408663357192f35d4b3dea2f93</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kM1KxDAUhYMoOo6-gAvp0k3H_DRJA24G8Q8GlHF0G9L0VlM67Zi0A76Nz-KTmWHUncKFe7mc88E5CJ0QPCGYiPN6UlvXTiimbILjEL6DRiSXIpUC8914KybSXKr8AB2GUGMssJJ0Hx0wSTDmXI5QPYeySx4H_-KsaZJp53tnk2fTrCGZw6oxFpbQ9sm06sEnD951Pll40wZr-lfY_J7BhyH8Ij4__mIcob3KNAGOv_cYPV1fLS5v09n9zd3ldJZaxkWfZhZKm0kquKCKMcsgp4IWBrAyGed5pjgrCpnhXAjGuCSKVoyXWcFKMLRSbIzOttyV794GCL1eumChaUwL3RA0zbFQKqanUUq3Uuu7EDxUeuXd0vh3TbDedKxrvelYbzrWOA7h0XT6zR-KJZS_lp9So-BiK4CYcu3A62AdtDGX82B7XXbuP_4X4pOOLw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2806995572</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Redo Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement After Prior Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><creator>Hawkins, Robert B. ; Deeb, G. Michael ; Sukul, Devraj ; Patel, Himanshu J. ; Gualano, Sarah K. ; Chetcuti, Stanley J. ; Grossman, P. Michael ; Ailawadi, Gorav ; Fukuhara, Shinichi</creator><creatorcontrib>Hawkins, Robert B. ; Deeb, G. Michael ; Sukul, Devraj ; Patel, Himanshu J. ; Gualano, Sarah K. ; Chetcuti, Stanley J. ; Grossman, P. Michael ; Ailawadi, Gorav ; Fukuhara, Shinichi</creatorcontrib><description>Aortic stenosis treatment should consider risks and benefits for lifetime management. Although the feasibility of redo transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) remains unclear, concerns are emerging regarding reoperation after TAVR.
The authors sought to define comparative risk of surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) after prior TAVR or SAVR.
Data on patients undergoing bioprosthetic SAVR after TAVR and/or SAVR were extracted from the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Database (2011-2021). Overall and isolated SAVR cohorts were analyzed. The primary outcome was operative mortality. Risk adjustment using hierarchical logistic regression as well as propensity score matching for isolated SAVR cases were performed.
Of 31,106 SAVR patients, 1,126 had prior TAVR (TAVR-SAVR), 674 had prior SAVR and TAVR (SAVR-TAVR-SAVR), and 29,306 had prior SAVR (SAVR-SAVR). Yearly rates of TAVR-SAVR and SAVR-TAVR-SAVR increased over time, whereas SAVR-SAVR was stable. The TAVR-SAVR patients were older, with higher acuity, and with greater comorbidities than other cohorts. The unadjusted operative mortality was highest in the TAVR-SAVR group (17% vs 12% vs 9%, respectively; P < 0.001). Compared with SAVR-SAVR, risk-adjusted operative mortality was significantly higher for TAVR-SAVR (OR: 1.53; P = 0.004), but not SAVR-TAVR-SAVR (OR: 1.02; P = 0.927). After propensity score matching, operative mortality of isolated SAVR was 1.74 times higher for TAVR-SAVR than SAVR-SAVR patients (P = 0.020).
The number of post-TAVR reoperations is increasing and represent a high-risk population. Yet even in isolated SAVR cases, SAVR after TAVR is independently associated with increased risk of mortality. Patients with life expectancy beyond a TAVR valve and unsuitable anatomy for redo-TAVR should consider a SAVR-first approach.
[Display omitted]</description><identifier>ISSN: 1936-8798</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1876-7605</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2023.03.015</identifier><identifier>PMID: 37100557</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>aortic stenosis ; Aortic Valve - diagnostic imaging ; Aortic Valve - surgery ; Aortic Valve Stenosis - diagnostic imaging ; Aortic Valve Stenosis - etiology ; Aortic Valve Stenosis - surgery ; Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation - adverse effects ; Humans ; reoperation ; Risk Assessment ; Risk Factors ; Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Surgery Database ; surgical aortic valve replacement ; transcatheter aortic valve replacement ; Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement - adverse effects ; Treatment Outcome</subject><ispartof>JACC. Cardiovascular interventions, 2023-04, Vol.16 (8), p.942-953</ispartof><rights>2023 American College of Cardiology Foundation</rights><rights>Copyright © 2023 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-4cedc4726562933c3e8262bae09a45584953bb7408663357192f35d4b3dea2f93</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-4cedc4726562933c3e8262bae09a45584953bb7408663357192f35d4b3dea2f93</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-3959-8201</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1936879823005745$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37100557$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Hawkins, Robert B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Deeb, G. Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sukul, Devraj</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Patel, Himanshu J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gualano, Sarah K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chetcuti, Stanley J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Grossman, P. Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ailawadi, Gorav</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fukuhara, Shinichi</creatorcontrib><title>Redo Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement After Prior Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement</title><title>JACC. Cardiovascular interventions</title><addtitle>JACC Cardiovasc Interv</addtitle><description>Aortic stenosis treatment should consider risks and benefits for lifetime management. Although the feasibility of redo transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) remains unclear, concerns are emerging regarding reoperation after TAVR.
The authors sought to define comparative risk of surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) after prior TAVR or SAVR.
Data on patients undergoing bioprosthetic SAVR after TAVR and/or SAVR were extracted from the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Database (2011-2021). Overall and isolated SAVR cohorts were analyzed. The primary outcome was operative mortality. Risk adjustment using hierarchical logistic regression as well as propensity score matching for isolated SAVR cases were performed.
Of 31,106 SAVR patients, 1,126 had prior TAVR (TAVR-SAVR), 674 had prior SAVR and TAVR (SAVR-TAVR-SAVR), and 29,306 had prior SAVR (SAVR-SAVR). Yearly rates of TAVR-SAVR and SAVR-TAVR-SAVR increased over time, whereas SAVR-SAVR was stable. The TAVR-SAVR patients were older, with higher acuity, and with greater comorbidities than other cohorts. The unadjusted operative mortality was highest in the TAVR-SAVR group (17% vs 12% vs 9%, respectively; P < 0.001). Compared with SAVR-SAVR, risk-adjusted operative mortality was significantly higher for TAVR-SAVR (OR: 1.53; P = 0.004), but not SAVR-TAVR-SAVR (OR: 1.02; P = 0.927). After propensity score matching, operative mortality of isolated SAVR was 1.74 times higher for TAVR-SAVR than SAVR-SAVR patients (P = 0.020).
The number of post-TAVR reoperations is increasing and represent a high-risk population. Yet even in isolated SAVR cases, SAVR after TAVR is independently associated with increased risk of mortality. Patients with life expectancy beyond a TAVR valve and unsuitable anatomy for redo-TAVR should consider a SAVR-first approach.
[Display omitted]</description><subject>aortic stenosis</subject><subject>Aortic Valve - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Aortic Valve - surgery</subject><subject>Aortic Valve Stenosis - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Aortic Valve Stenosis - etiology</subject><subject>Aortic Valve Stenosis - surgery</subject><subject>Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation - adverse effects</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>reoperation</subject><subject>Risk Assessment</subject><subject>Risk Factors</subject><subject>Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Surgery Database</subject><subject>surgical aortic valve replacement</subject><subject>transcatheter aortic valve replacement</subject><subject>Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement - adverse effects</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><issn>1936-8798</issn><issn>1876-7605</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kM1KxDAUhYMoOo6-gAvp0k3H_DRJA24G8Q8GlHF0G9L0VlM67Zi0A76Nz-KTmWHUncKFe7mc88E5CJ0QPCGYiPN6UlvXTiimbILjEL6DRiSXIpUC8914KybSXKr8AB2GUGMssJJ0Hx0wSTDmXI5QPYeySx4H_-KsaZJp53tnk2fTrCGZw6oxFpbQ9sm06sEnD951Pll40wZr-lfY_J7BhyH8Ij4__mIcob3KNAGOv_cYPV1fLS5v09n9zd3ldJZaxkWfZhZKm0kquKCKMcsgp4IWBrAyGed5pjgrCpnhXAjGuCSKVoyXWcFKMLRSbIzOttyV794GCL1eumChaUwL3RA0zbFQKqanUUq3Uuu7EDxUeuXd0vh3TbDedKxrvelYbzrWOA7h0XT6zR-KJZS_lp9So-BiK4CYcu3A62AdtDGX82B7XXbuP_4X4pOOLw</recordid><startdate>20230424</startdate><enddate>20230424</enddate><creator>Hawkins, Robert B.</creator><creator>Deeb, G. Michael</creator><creator>Sukul, Devraj</creator><creator>Patel, Himanshu J.</creator><creator>Gualano, Sarah K.</creator><creator>Chetcuti, Stanley J.</creator><creator>Grossman, P. Michael</creator><creator>Ailawadi, Gorav</creator><creator>Fukuhara, Shinichi</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3959-8201</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20230424</creationdate><title>Redo Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement After Prior Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement</title><author>Hawkins, Robert B. ; Deeb, G. Michael ; Sukul, Devraj ; Patel, Himanshu J. ; Gualano, Sarah K. ; Chetcuti, Stanley J. ; Grossman, P. Michael ; Ailawadi, Gorav ; Fukuhara, Shinichi</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-4cedc4726562933c3e8262bae09a45584953bb7408663357192f35d4b3dea2f93</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>aortic stenosis</topic><topic>Aortic Valve - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Aortic Valve - surgery</topic><topic>Aortic Valve Stenosis - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Aortic Valve Stenosis - etiology</topic><topic>Aortic Valve Stenosis - surgery</topic><topic>Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation - adverse effects</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>reoperation</topic><topic>Risk Assessment</topic><topic>Risk Factors</topic><topic>Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Surgery Database</topic><topic>surgical aortic valve replacement</topic><topic>transcatheter aortic valve replacement</topic><topic>Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement - adverse effects</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Hawkins, Robert B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Deeb, G. Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sukul, Devraj</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Patel, Himanshu J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gualano, Sarah K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chetcuti, Stanley J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Grossman, P. Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ailawadi, Gorav</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fukuhara, Shinichi</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>JACC. Cardiovascular interventions</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Hawkins, Robert B.</au><au>Deeb, G. Michael</au><au>Sukul, Devraj</au><au>Patel, Himanshu J.</au><au>Gualano, Sarah K.</au><au>Chetcuti, Stanley J.</au><au>Grossman, P. Michael</au><au>Ailawadi, Gorav</au><au>Fukuhara, Shinichi</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Redo Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement After Prior Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement</atitle><jtitle>JACC. Cardiovascular interventions</jtitle><addtitle>JACC Cardiovasc Interv</addtitle><date>2023-04-24</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>16</volume><issue>8</issue><spage>942</spage><epage>953</epage><pages>942-953</pages><issn>1936-8798</issn><eissn>1876-7605</eissn><abstract>Aortic stenosis treatment should consider risks and benefits for lifetime management. Although the feasibility of redo transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) remains unclear, concerns are emerging regarding reoperation after TAVR.
The authors sought to define comparative risk of surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) after prior TAVR or SAVR.
Data on patients undergoing bioprosthetic SAVR after TAVR and/or SAVR were extracted from the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Database (2011-2021). Overall and isolated SAVR cohorts were analyzed. The primary outcome was operative mortality. Risk adjustment using hierarchical logistic regression as well as propensity score matching for isolated SAVR cases were performed.
Of 31,106 SAVR patients, 1,126 had prior TAVR (TAVR-SAVR), 674 had prior SAVR and TAVR (SAVR-TAVR-SAVR), and 29,306 had prior SAVR (SAVR-SAVR). Yearly rates of TAVR-SAVR and SAVR-TAVR-SAVR increased over time, whereas SAVR-SAVR was stable. The TAVR-SAVR patients were older, with higher acuity, and with greater comorbidities than other cohorts. The unadjusted operative mortality was highest in the TAVR-SAVR group (17% vs 12% vs 9%, respectively; P < 0.001). Compared with SAVR-SAVR, risk-adjusted operative mortality was significantly higher for TAVR-SAVR (OR: 1.53; P = 0.004), but not SAVR-TAVR-SAVR (OR: 1.02; P = 0.927). After propensity score matching, operative mortality of isolated SAVR was 1.74 times higher for TAVR-SAVR than SAVR-SAVR patients (P = 0.020).
The number of post-TAVR reoperations is increasing and represent a high-risk population. Yet even in isolated SAVR cases, SAVR after TAVR is independently associated with increased risk of mortality. Patients with life expectancy beyond a TAVR valve and unsuitable anatomy for redo-TAVR should consider a SAVR-first approach.
[Display omitted]</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>37100557</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.jcin.2023.03.015</doi><tpages>12</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3959-8201</orcidid></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1936-8798 |
ispartof | JACC. Cardiovascular interventions, 2023-04, Vol.16 (8), p.942-953 |
issn | 1936-8798 1876-7605 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2806995572 |
source | MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals |
subjects | aortic stenosis Aortic Valve - diagnostic imaging Aortic Valve - surgery Aortic Valve Stenosis - diagnostic imaging Aortic Valve Stenosis - etiology Aortic Valve Stenosis - surgery Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation - adverse effects Humans reoperation Risk Assessment Risk Factors Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Surgery Database surgical aortic valve replacement transcatheter aortic valve replacement Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement - adverse effects Treatment Outcome |
title | Redo Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement After Prior Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-06T20%3A01%3A40IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Redo%20Surgical%20Aortic%20Valve%20Replacement%20After%20Prior%20Transcatheter%20Versus%20Surgical%C2%A0Aortic%20Valve%20Replacement&rft.jtitle=JACC.%20Cardiovascular%20interventions&rft.au=Hawkins,%20Robert%20B.&rft.date=2023-04-24&rft.volume=16&rft.issue=8&rft.spage=942&rft.epage=953&rft.pages=942-953&rft.issn=1936-8798&rft.eissn=1876-7605&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jcin.2023.03.015&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2806995572%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2806995572&rft_id=info:pmid/37100557&rft_els_id=S1936879823005745&rfr_iscdi=true |