Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Low-Risk Patients: A Propensity Score Matched Analysis

Background: Since the introduction of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in 2002 as alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR), benefits of TAVI were shown for high- and intermediate-risk surgical patients although industry-independent trials substantiating findings of landmark studies are lacking. However, currently, TAVI and SAVR for low-risk patients are compared in several trials. We herein aimed to determine differences in outcomes of SAVR and TAVI in surgical low-risk patients.

Methods: Between 2008 and 2016, 2,549 patients received TAVI and 1,506 received isolated SAVR at our institution. For comparison, all TAVI/SAVR patients with a log EuroSCORE II ˂4% and transfemoral (TF) approach were included. Exclusion comprised non-TF, concomitant procedures, non-CE mark devices, cases of aortic regurgitation, re-do (valve-in-valve), stentless bioprostheses, and endocarditis leading to 437 TAVI and 234 SAVR patients. After propensity score matching, cohorts presented no significant intergroup differences in baseline parameters (TAVI n = 114/SAVR n = 114). Outcomes were evaluated in accordance to VARC-2 criteria.

Results: The 30-day outcomes presented no significant differences regarding death (TAVI 2/114 vs. SAVR 2/114, p = 1.0), stroke (3/114 vs. 3/114, p = 1.0), acute kidney injury (8/114 vs. 3/114, p = 0.35), or permanent pacemaker implantation (PPM) (16.8 vs. 8.5%, p = 0.12). Length of ICU stay was 2.3 ± 3.3 vs. 2.4 ± 2.8 days (p = 0.73) and length of hospital stay 9.7 ± 8.9 vs. 7.2 ± 5.6 days (p = 0.01). Hemodynamic outcomes revealed comparable valve performance regarding postprocedural transvalvular pressure gradients (pmax: 21.0 vs. 20.0 mm Hg, p = 0.8; pmean: 10.0 vs. 11.0 mm Hg, p = 0.7) but more significant paravalvular leakage (PVL) in the TAVI group (PVL ≥2: 7.7 vs. 0.9%, p = 0.02; PVL grade 1: 40.8 vs. 4.6%; p ˂ 0.001). Kaplan–Meier survival analysis presented similar 1- and 5-year survival for TAVI and SAVR.

Conclusion: In this analysis, TAVI presented comparable outcomes to SAVR in surgical low-risk patients. Remaining drawbacks of TAVI are higher rates of PPM implantation and significant PVL. Survival analysis showed similar long-term outcomes in the matched patient cohorts. Although statistically not significant, drawback of TAVI in 5-year survival may be founded in hidden confounders in terms of patient selection. These findings will have to be confirmed in larger prospective trials.

 

Scroll to top

No conflict of interest has been declared by the author(s).