Availability of transcatheter aortic valve implantation across hospitals and differences in strategies and clinical outcomes in patients with severe aortic stenosis.
{"title":"Availability of transcatheter aortic valve implantation across hospitals and differences in strategies and clinical outcomes in patients with severe aortic stenosis.","authors":"Yasuaki Takeji, Tomohiko Taniguchi, Takeshi Morimoto, Shinichi Shirai, Takeshi Kitai, Hiroyuki Tabata, Nobuhisa Ohno, Ryosuke Murai, Kohei Osakada, Koichiro Murata, Masanao Nakai, Hiroshi Tsuneyoshi, Tomohisa Tada, Masashi Amano, Shin Watanabe, Hiroki Shiomi, Hirotoshi Watanabe, Yusuke Yoshikawa, Ryusuke Nishikawa, Yuki Obayashi, Ko Yamamoto, Mamoru Toyofuku, Shojiro Tatsushima, Norio Kanamori, Makoto Miyake, Hiroyuki Nakayama, Kazuya Nagao, Masayasu Izuhara, Kenji Nakatsuma, Moriaki Inoko, Takanari Fujita, Masahiro Kimura, Mitsuru Ishii, Shunsuke Usami, Fumiko Nakazeki, Kiyonori Togi, Yasutaka Inuzuka, Kenji Ando, Tatsuhiko Komiya, Koh Ono, Kenji Minatoya, Takeshi Kimura","doi":"10.1007/s12928-024-01054-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>There was a scarcity of data evaluating variations in treatment approaches and clinical outcomes for severe aortic stenosis (AS) between medical centers with and without availability of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Current study population was 2993 patients with severe AS enrolled in the CURRENT AS Registry-2 (2581 patients from 10 TAVI centers; 412 patients from 10 non-TAVI centers). TAVI centers more frequently opted for the initial aortic valve replacement (AVR) strategy compared to non-TAVI centers (60% and 40%, P < 0.001). Among patients with the initial AVR strategy, TAVI centers disproportionately favored the initial TAVI strategy compared to non-TAVI centers (71% and 23%, P < 0.001). No significant differences were observed in the risk of a composite of all-cause death or heart failure hospitalization between TAVI and non-TAVI centers in the entire study population (cumulative 3-year incidence: 32.0% and 31.0%, P = 0.37; adjusted hazard ratios: 0.92, 95% confidence intervals: 0.74-1.15, P = 0.45) or in conservative, initial AVR, initial surgical AVR, and initial TAVI strata. A substantial disparity exists in the treatment strategies for patients with severe AS between TAVI and non-TAVI centers. TAVI centers tended to perform AVR, particularly TAVI, earlier and more frequently. However, there was no discernible distinction in the risk of the composite of all-cause death or HF hospitalization between TAVI and non-TAVI centers. UMINID: UMIN000034169.</p>","PeriodicalId":9439,"journal":{"name":"Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12928-024-01054-w","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
There was a scarcity of data evaluating variations in treatment approaches and clinical outcomes for severe aortic stenosis (AS) between medical centers with and without availability of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Current study population was 2993 patients with severe AS enrolled in the CURRENT AS Registry-2 (2581 patients from 10 TAVI centers; 412 patients from 10 non-TAVI centers). TAVI centers more frequently opted for the initial aortic valve replacement (AVR) strategy compared to non-TAVI centers (60% and 40%, P < 0.001). Among patients with the initial AVR strategy, TAVI centers disproportionately favored the initial TAVI strategy compared to non-TAVI centers (71% and 23%, P < 0.001). No significant differences were observed in the risk of a composite of all-cause death or heart failure hospitalization between TAVI and non-TAVI centers in the entire study population (cumulative 3-year incidence: 32.0% and 31.0%, P = 0.37; adjusted hazard ratios: 0.92, 95% confidence intervals: 0.74-1.15, P = 0.45) or in conservative, initial AVR, initial surgical AVR, and initial TAVI strata. A substantial disparity exists in the treatment strategies for patients with severe AS between TAVI and non-TAVI centers. TAVI centers tended to perform AVR, particularly TAVI, earlier and more frequently. However, there was no discernible distinction in the risk of the composite of all-cause death or HF hospitalization between TAVI and non-TAVI centers. UMINID: UMIN000034169.
期刊介绍:
Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics (CVIT) is an international journal covering the field of cardiovascular disease and includes cardiac (coronary and noncoronary) and peripheral interventions and therapeutics. Articles are subject to peer review and complete editorial evaluation prior to any decision regarding acceptability. CVIT is an official journal of The Japanese Association of Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics.