Eight-year outcomes for patients with aortic valve stenosis at low surgical risk randomized to transcatheter vs. surgical aortic valve replacement

• Jørgensen H. Troels
• Thyregod H.G.H.
• Ihlemann N.
• Nissen H.
• Petursson P.
• Kjeldsen B.J.
• Steinbrüchel D.A.
• Olsen P.S.
• Søndergaard L.

Abstract

The aims of the study were to compare clinical outcomes and valve durability after 8 years of followup in patients with symptomatic severe aortic valve stenosis at low surgical risk treated with either transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR).

Methods and results. In the NOTION trial, patients with symptomatic severe aortic valve stenosis were randomized to TAVI or SAVR. Clinical status, echocardiography, structural valve deterioration, and failure were assessed using standardized definitions. In total, 280 patients were randomized to TAVI (n=145) or SAVR (n=135). Baseline characteristics were similar, including mean age of 79.1±4.8 years and a mean STS score of 3.0±1.7%. At 8-year follow-up, the estimated risk of the composite outcome of all-cause mortality, stroke, or myocardial infarction was 54.5% after TAVI and 54.8% after SAVR (p=0.94). The estimated risks for all-cause mortality (51.8 vs 52.6%; p=0.90), stroke (8.3 vs 9.1%; p=0.90), or myocardial infarction (6.2 vs 3.8%; p=0.33) were similar after TAVI and SAVR. The risk of structural valve deterioration was lower after TAVI than after SAVR (13.9 vs 28.3%; p=0.0017), whereas the risk of bioprosthetic valve failure was similar (8.7 vs 10.5%; p=0.61).

Conclusion. In patients with severe aortic valve stenosis at low surgical risk randomized to TAVI or SAVR, there were no significant differences in the risk for all-cause mortality, stroke, or myocardial infarction, as well as the risk of bioprosthetic valve failure after 8 years of follow-up.

References

1. Jorgensen T.H. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients with lower surgical risk. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2020; 13: 332–4.

2. Thyregod H.G.H., Ihlemann N., Jorgensen T.H., Nissen H., Kjeldsen B.J., Petursson P., et al. Five-year clinical and echocardiographic outcomes from the NOTION randomized clinical trial in patients at lower surgical risk. Circulation. 2019; 139: 2714–23.

3. Reardon M.J., Van Mieghem N.M., Popma J.J., Kleiman N.S., Sondergaard L., Mumtaz M., et al.; SURTAVI Investigators. Surgical or transcatheter aortic-valve replacement in intermediate-risk patients. N Engl J Med. 2017; 376: 1321–31.

4. Popma J.J., Deeb G.M., Yakubov S.J., Mumtaz M., Gada H., O’Hair D., et al.; Evolut Low Risk Trial Investigators. Transcatheter aortic-valve replacement with a self-expanding valve in low-risk patients. N Engl J Med. 2019; 380: 1706–15.

5. Mack M.J., Leon M.B., Thourani V.H., Makkar R., Kodali S.K., Russo M., et al.; PARTNER 3 Investigators. Transcatheter aortic-valve replacement with a balloon-expandable valve in low-risk patients. N Engl J Med. 2019; 380: 1695–705.

6. Mack M.J., Leon M.B., Smith C.R., Miller D.C., Moses J.W., Tuzcu E.M., et al.; PARTNER 1 Trial Investigators. 5-year outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement or surgical aortic valve replacement for high surgical risk patients with aortic stenosis (PARTNER 1): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2015; 385: 2477–84.

7. Gleason T.G., Reardon M.J., Popma J.J., Deeb G.M., Yakubov S.J., Lee J.S., et al.; CoreValve U.S. Pivotal High Risk Trial Clinical Investigators. 5-Year outcomes of self-expanding transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in high-risk patients. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018; 72: 2687–96.

8. Makkar R.R., Thourani V.H., Mack M.J., Kodali S.K., Kapadia S., Webb J.G., et al.; PARTNER 2 Investigators. Five-year outcomes of transcatheter or surgical aortic-valve replacement. N Engl J Med. 2020; 382: 799–809.

9. Otto C.M., Nishimura R.A., Bonow R.O., Carabello B.A., Erwin J.P., Gentile F., et al. 2020 ACC/AHA guideline for the management of patients with valvular heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Circulation. 2021; 143: e35–71.

10. Baumgartner H., Falk V., Bax J.J., De Bonis M., Hamm C., Holm P.J., et al.; ESC Scientific Document Group. 2017 ESC/EACTS Guidelines for the management of valvular heart disease. Eur Heart J. 2017; 38: 2739–91.

11. Otto C.M. Informed shared decisions for patients with aortic stenosis. N Engl J Med. 2019; 380: 1769–70.

12. Sondergaard L. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients with longer life expectancy: what measures are needed? Eur Heart J. 2019; 40: 1331–3.

13. Sondergaard L., Ihlemann N., Capodanno D., Jorgensen T.H., Nissen H., Kjeldsen B.J., et al. Durability of transcatheter and surgical bioprosthetic aortic valves in patients at lower surgical risk. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019; 73: 546–53.

14. Thyregod H.G., Sondergaard L., Ihlemann N., Franzen O., Andersen L.W., Hansen P.B., et al. The Nordic Aortic Valve Intervention (NOTION) trial comparing transcatheter versus surgical valve implantation: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial. Trials. 2013; 14: 11.

15. Thyregod H.G.H., Steinbruchel D.A., Ihlemann N., Nissen H., Kjeldsen B.J., Petursson P., et al. Transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with severe aortic valve stenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015; 65: 2184–94.

16. Capodanno D., Petronio A.S., Prendergast B., Eltchaninoff H., Vahanian A., Modine T., et al. Standardized definitions of structural deterioration and valve failure in assessing long-term durability of transcatheter and surgical aortic bioprosthetic valves: a consensus statement from the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) endorsed by the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS). Eur Heart J. 2017; 38: 3382–90.

17. Durack D.T., Lukes A.S., Bright D.K. New criteria for diagnosis of infective endocarditis: utilization of specific echocardiographic findings. Duke Endocarditis Service. Am J Med. 1994; 96: 200–9.

18. Carroll J.D., Mack M.J., Vemulapalli S., Herrmann H.C., Gleason T.G., Hanzel G., et al. STS-ACC TVT registry of transcatheter aortic valve replacement. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020; 76: 2492–516.

19. Jorgensen T.H., De Backer O., Gerds T.A., Bieliauskas G., Svendsen J.H., Sondergaard L. Mortality and heart failure hospitalization in patients with conduction abnormalities after transcatheter aortic valve replacement. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2019; 12: 52–61.

20. Faroux L., Chen S., Muntane-Carol G., Regueiro A., Philippon F., Sondergaard L., et al. Clinical impact of conduction disturbances in transcatheter aortic valve replacement recipients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Heart J. 2020; 41: 2771–81.

21. Sawaya F., Jorgensen T.H., Sondergaard L., De Backer O. Transcatheter bioprosthetic aortic valve dysfunction: what we know so far. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2019; 6: 145.

22. Rodriguez-Gabella T., Voisine P., Puri R., Pibarot P., Rodes-Cabau J. Aortic bioprosthetic valve durability. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017; 70: 1013–28.

23. Pibarot P., Ternacle J., Jaber W.A., Salaun E., Dahou A., Asch F.M., et al.; PARTNER 2 Investigators. Structural deterioration of transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve bioprostheses in the PARTNER-2 trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020; 76: 1830–43.

24. Genereux P., Piazza N., Alu M.C., Nazif T., Hahn R.T., Pibarot P., et al. Valve Academic Research Consortium 3: updated endpoint definitions for aortic valve clinical research. Eur Heart J. 2021. 42 (19): 1825–57.

25. Butt J.H., Ihlemann N., Backer O.D., Sondergaard L., Havers-Borgersen E., Gislason G.H., et al. Long-term risk of infective endocarditis after transcatheter aortic valve replacement. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019; 73: 1646–55.

26. Minami K., Zittermann A., Schulte-Eistrup S., Koertke H., Korfer R. Mitroflow synergy prostheses for aortic valve replacement: 19 years’ experience with 1,516 patients. Ann Thorac Surg. 2005; 80: 1699–705.

27. Kaneyuki D., Nakajima H., Asakura T., Yoshitake A., Tokunaga C., Tochii M., et al. Early first-generation trifecta valve failure: a case series and a review of the literature. Ann Thorac Surg. 2020; 109: 86–92.

All articles in our journal are distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0 license)