Impact of Atrial Fibrillation Type on Outcomes of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement for Aortic Stenosis: A Single-Center Analysis.

IF 0.9 4区 医学 Texas Heart Institute Journal Pub Date : 2024-12-12 eCollection Date: 2024-07-01 DOI:10.14503/THIJ-24-8402
Yoshiyuki Yamashita, Serge Sicouri, Massimo Baudo, Roberto Rodriguez, Eric M Gnall, Paul M Coady, Harish Jarrett, Sandra V Abramson, Katie M Hawthorne, Scott M Goldman, William A Gray, Basel Ramlawi
{"title":"Impact of Atrial Fibrillation Type on Outcomes of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement for Aortic Stenosis: A Single-Center Analysis.","authors":"Yoshiyuki Yamashita, Serge Sicouri, Massimo Baudo, Roberto Rodriguez, Eric M Gnall, Paul M Coady, Harish Jarrett, Sandra V Abramson, Katie M Hawthorne, Scott M Goldman, William A Gray, Basel Ramlawi","doi":"10.14503/THIJ-24-8402","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a recognized risk factor for mortality after transcatheter aortic valve replacement for severe aortic stenosis, but the impact of different types of AF on clinical outcomes remains unclear.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study included 982 patients divided into 3 groups: no AF, paroxysmal AF, and nonparoxysmal AF (persistent or permanent). Clinical outcomes were analyzed using inverse probability weighting and multivariate models.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 610, 211, and 161 patients in the no-AF, paroxysmal AF, and nonparoxysmal AF groups, respectively. For the entire cohort, the mean (SD) age was 82 (7.7) years, and the periprocedural, 1-year, and 5-year mortality rates were 2.0%, 12%, and 50%, respectively. After inverse probability weighting, the periprocedural mortality rate was higher in the nonparoxysmal AF group than in the no-AF group (odds ratio, 4.71 [95% CI, 1.24-17.9]). During 5 years of follow-up (median [IQR], 22 [0-69] months), all-cause mortality was higher in the nonparoxysmal AF group than in the no-AF group (hazard ratio [HR], 1.56 [95% CI, 1.14-2.14]; <i>P</i> = .006). The paroxysmal AF group was not associated with worse clinical outcomes than the no-AF group (HR, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.81-1.49]) for all-cause mortality. Stroke rates were comparable among the 3 groups. Multivariate analysis also showed increased all-cause mortality in the nonparoxysmal AF group compared with the no-AF group (adjusted HR, 1.43 [95% CI, 1.06-1.93]; <i>P</i> = .018), while all-cause mortality was comparable between the paroxysmal AF and no-AF groups (adjusted HR, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.75-1.33]).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement for severe aortic stenosis, having nonparoxysmal AF was associated with a higher risk of periprocedural and all-cause mortality compared with having no AF. Paroxysmal AF showed no such association.</p>","PeriodicalId":48680,"journal":{"name":"Texas Heart Institute Journal","volume":"51 2","pages":"e248402"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11638471/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Texas Heart Institute Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14503/THIJ-24-8402","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a recognized risk factor for mortality after transcatheter aortic valve replacement for severe aortic stenosis, but the impact of different types of AF on clinical outcomes remains unclear.

Methods: This retrospective study included 982 patients divided into 3 groups: no AF, paroxysmal AF, and nonparoxysmal AF (persistent or permanent). Clinical outcomes were analyzed using inverse probability weighting and multivariate models.

Results: There were 610, 211, and 161 patients in the no-AF, paroxysmal AF, and nonparoxysmal AF groups, respectively. For the entire cohort, the mean (SD) age was 82 (7.7) years, and the periprocedural, 1-year, and 5-year mortality rates were 2.0%, 12%, and 50%, respectively. After inverse probability weighting, the periprocedural mortality rate was higher in the nonparoxysmal AF group than in the no-AF group (odds ratio, 4.71 [95% CI, 1.24-17.9]). During 5 years of follow-up (median [IQR], 22 [0-69] months), all-cause mortality was higher in the nonparoxysmal AF group than in the no-AF group (hazard ratio [HR], 1.56 [95% CI, 1.14-2.14]; P = .006). The paroxysmal AF group was not associated with worse clinical outcomes than the no-AF group (HR, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.81-1.49]) for all-cause mortality. Stroke rates were comparable among the 3 groups. Multivariate analysis also showed increased all-cause mortality in the nonparoxysmal AF group compared with the no-AF group (adjusted HR, 1.43 [95% CI, 1.06-1.93]; P = .018), while all-cause mortality was comparable between the paroxysmal AF and no-AF groups (adjusted HR, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.75-1.33]).

Conclusion: In patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement for severe aortic stenosis, having nonparoxysmal AF was associated with a higher risk of periprocedural and all-cause mortality compared with having no AF. Paroxysmal AF showed no such association.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
心房颤动类型对经导管主动脉瓣置换术治疗主动脉狭窄结果的影响:一项单中心分析
背景:房颤(AF)是严重主动脉瓣狭窄经导管主动脉瓣置换术后死亡的公认危险因素,但不同类型房颤对临床结果的影响尚不清楚。方法:回顾性研究982例患者,分为3组:无房颤、阵发性房颤和非阵发性房颤(持续性或永久性)。临床结果分析采用逆概率加权和多变量模型。结果:无房颤组610例,阵发性房颤组211例,非阵发性房颤组161例。整个队列的平均(SD)年龄为82(7.7)岁,围手术期、1年和5年死亡率分别为2.0%、12%和50%。反概率加权后,非阵发性房颤组围手术期死亡率高于无房颤组(优势比为4.71 [95% CI, 1.24-17.9])。在5年随访期间(中位[IQR], 22[0-69]个月),非阵发性房颤组的全因死亡率高于无房颤组(风险比[HR], 1.56 [95% CI, 1.14-2.14];P = .006)。阵发性房颤组的全因死亡率与无房颤组的临床结果无显著相关性(HR, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.81-1.49])。三组间卒中发生率具有可比性。多因素分析还显示,与无房颤组相比,非阵发性房颤组的全因死亡率增加(校正HR, 1.43 [95% CI, 1.06-1.93];P = 0.018),而阵发性房颤组和非房颤组的全因死亡率具有可比性(校正HR, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.75-1.33])。结论:在接受经导管主动脉瓣置换术治疗严重主动脉瓣狭窄的患者中,与没有房颤的患者相比,非阵发性房颤的围手术期死亡率和全因死亡率更高,而阵发性房颤没有这种相关性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Texas Heart Institute Journal
Texas Heart Institute Journal CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-
自引率
11.10%
发文量
131
期刊介绍: For more than 45 years, the Texas Heart Institute Journal has been published by the Texas Heart Institute as part of its medical education program. Our bimonthly peer-reviewed journal enjoys a global audience of physicians, scientists, and healthcare professionals who are contributing to the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of cardiovascular disease. The Journal was printed under the name of Cardiovascular Diseases from 1974 through 1981 (ISSN 0093-3546). The name was changed to Texas Heart Institute Journal in 1982 and was printed through 2013 (ISSN 0730-2347). In 2014, the Journal moved to online-only publication. It is indexed by Index Medicus/MEDLINE and by other indexing and abstracting services worldwide. Our full archive is available at PubMed Central. The Journal invites authors to submit these article types for review: -Clinical Investigations- Laboratory Investigations- Reviews- Techniques- Coronary Anomalies- History of Medicine- Case Reports/Case Series (Submission Fee: $70.00 USD)- Images in Cardiovascular Medicine (Submission Fee: $35.00 USD)- Guest Editorials- Peabody’s Corner- Letters to the Editor
期刊最新文献
Analysis of Clinical Symptoms and Risk Factors Related to Functional Prognosis in Patients With Cardiogenic Stroke. Trends in Cardiovascular Disease-Related Mortality in Texas. Correlation Between Lipoprotein(a) and Prognosis for Coronary Artery Disease in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention. Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion: Current Landscape and Future Direction. Cardiac Neuroablation for Vagal-Induced Bradyarrhythmias.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1