HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Personal Folders Download to citation manager Author home page(s): Todd M. Dewey David L. Brown William H. Ryan Syma L. Prince Michael J. Mack Permission Requests Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Dewey, T. M. Articles by Mack, M. J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Dewey, T. M. Articles by Mack, M. J. Related Collections Valve disease

---

Original Articles: Adult Cardiac

High-Risk Patients Referred for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: Management and Outcomes

^a Cardiopulmonary Research Science and Technology Institute, Dallas, Texas
^b Medical City Dallas Hospital, Dallas, Texas

Accepted for publication July 16, 2008.

^_* Address correspondence to Dr Dewey, 7777 Forest Lane, Suite A323, Dallas, TX 75230 (Email: tdewey{at}CSANT.com).

Presented at the Forty-fourth Annual Meeting of The Society of Thoracic Surgeons, Ft. Lauderdale, FL, Jan 28–30, 2008.

Background: Aortic valve replacement (AVR) is the treatment of choice for critical aortic stenosis. Selected patients have not previously been referred for AVR because of excessive risk of mortality and morbidity with surgery. The option of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has increased referral of this high-risk cohort for therapeutic intervention. We report the management and outcomes of these patients.

Methods: Patients referred for TAVI from December 2005 to December 2007 were evaluated and followed up for intermediate-term all cause mortality. Patients received medical management, TAVI, conventional AVR, or balloon valvuloplasty (BAV) based on risk profile, hemodynamic and echocardiographic criteria, physician judgment, or patient choice. Patients were compared for demographics, Society of Thoracic Surgeons predicted risk of mortality score, and outcomes after AVR, TAVI, or BAV.

Results: One hundred five patients were referred for TAVI during a 24-month period. Fifty-two patients (49.5%) received medical management, 16 (15.2%) conventional AVR, 21 (20.0%) received TAVI, and 16 (15.2%) received BAV. Patients were classified as medical management because of physician or patient choice, not meeting TAVI criteria, or underevaluation for a possible procedure. For all patients the average length of follow-up was 159 ± 147 days. Patients receiving BAV had a Society of Thoracic Surgeons predicted risk of mortality score greater than those having medical management, AVR, or TAVI. Thirty-day mortality was 1 of 16 patients (6.3%) for AVR, 2 of 21 patients (9.5%) with TAVI, 2 of 16 patients (12.5%) for BAV, and 7 of 52 patients (13.5%) for the medical management cohort. Overall mortality during follow-up was 42.3% (22 of 52 patients) for medical management, 19.1% (4 of 21 patients) for TAVI, 12.5% (2 of 16 patients) for AVR, and 37.5% (6 of 16 patients) for BAV.

Conclusions: The population of patients screened for transcatheter therapy is complex and heterogeneous. Medical management alone demonstrates a high mortality rate, and BAV, although providing transient symptomatic relief, does not favorably impact survival. The majority of referred patients (65.7%), including those that declined intervention, were candidates for some form of valve replacement therapy, either TAVI or AVR. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation can be performed in appropriately selected patients with good early and immediate-term outcomes.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. Watt, S. Mealing, J. Eaton, N. Piazza, N. Moat, P. Brasseur, S. Palmer, R. Busca, and M. Sculpher Cost-effectiveness of transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients ineligible for conventional aortic valve replacement Heart, March 1, 2012; 98(5): 370 - 376. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. E. Bavaria, W. Y. Szeto, L. A. Roche, E. K. Walsh, V. Buckley-Blaskovich, L. P. Solometo, K. E. Burtch, N. D. Desai, and H. C. Herrmann The Progression of a Transcatheter Aortic Valve Program: A Decision Analysis of More Than 680 Patient Referrals Ann. Thorac. Surg., December 1, 2011; 92(6): 2072 - 2077. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. Tarricone and M. Drummond Challenges in the clinical and economic evaluation of medical devices: The case of transcatheter aortic valve implantation Journal of Medical Marketing: Device, Diagnostic and Pharmacetical Marketing, August 1, 2011; 11(3): 221 - 229. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. C. Malaisrie, E. Tuday, B. Lapin, E. Wang, R. Lee, E. C. McGee, C. Davidson, and P. M. McCarthy Transcatheter aortic valve implantation decreases the rate of unoperated aortic stenosis, Eur J Cardiothorac Surg, July 1, 2011; 40(1): 43 - 48. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Z. Khawaja, R. Rajani, A. Cook, A. Khavandi, A. Moynagh, S. Chowdhary, M. S. Spence, S. Brown, S. Q. Khan, N. Walker, et al. Permanent Pacemaker Insertion After CoreValve Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: Incidence and Contributing Factors (the UK CoreValve Collaborative) Circulation, March 8, 2011; 123(9): 951 - 960. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J.-M. Sinning, A. Ghanem, H. Steinhauser, V. Adenauer, C. Hammerstingl, G. Nickenig, and N. Werner Renal Function as Predictor of Mortality in Patients After Percutaneous Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. Intv., November 1, 2010; 3(11): 1141 - 1149. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. K. Ghanta, P. S. Shekar, S. McGurk, D. M. Rosborough, and S. F. Aranki Nonelective cardiac surgery in the elderly: Is it justified? J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., July 1, 2010; 140(1): 103 - 109. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. W. A. Chu, M. A. Borger, F. W. Mohr, and T. Walther Transcatheter heart-valve replacement: update Can. Med. Assoc. J., May 18, 2010; 182(8): 791 - 795. [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. C. Malaisrie, P. M. McCarthy, E. C. McGee, R. Lee, V. H. Rigolin, C. J. Davidson, N. Beohar, B. Lapin, H. Subacius, and R. O. Bonow Contemporary Perioperative Results of Isolated Aortic Valve Replacement for Aortic Stenosis Ann. Thorac. Surg., March 1, 2010; 89(3): 751 - 756. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. A. Klein, S. T. Webb, S. Tsui, C. Sudarshan, L. Shapiro, and C. Densem Transcatheter aortic valve insertion: anaesthetic implications of emerging new technology Br. J. Anaesth., December 1, 2009; 103(6): 792 - 799. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Thielmann, D. Wendt, H. Eggebrecht, P. Kahlert, P. Massoudy, M. Kamler, R. Erbel, H. Jakob, and S. Sack Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Patients With Very High Risk for Conventional Aortic Valve Replacement Ann. Thorac. Surg., November 1, 2009; 88(5): 1468 - 1474. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. Manasse Cooks and recipes Eur J Cardiothorac Surg, November 1, 2009; 36(5): 787 - 790. [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. H. Adams, A. C. Anyanwu, J. Chikwe, and F. Filsoufi The Year in Cardiovascular Surgery J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., June 23, 2009; 53(25): 2389 - 2403. [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. L Field, J. Sammut, M. Kuduvalli, A. Oo, and A. Rashid Hybrid theatres: nicety or necessity? J R Soc Med, March 1, 2009; 102(3): 92 - 97. [Full Text] [PDF]