Jake Awtry, Thais Faggion Vinholo, Mansoo Cho, Philip Allen, Robert Semco, Sameer Hirji, Siobhan McGurk, Paige Newell, Tanujit Dey, Mark J Cunningham, Ashraf Sabe, Kim de la Cruz
{"title":"Redo Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement versus Valve-in-Valve Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement for Degenerated Bioprosthetic Valves.","authors":"Jake Awtry, Thais Faggion Vinholo, Mansoo Cho, Philip Allen, Robert Semco, Sameer Hirji, Siobhan McGurk, Paige Newell, Tanujit Dey, Mark J Cunningham, Ashraf Sabe, Kim de la Cruz","doi":"10.1016/j.athoracsur.2025.01.006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve replacement (ViV-TAVR) is associated with improved perioperative safety compared to redo surgical aortic valve replacement (redo-SAVR), but long-term outcomes remain uncertain. We therefore compare long-term outcomes of ViV-TAVR and redo-SAVR.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study included 1:1 propensity-matched Medicare beneficiaries with degenerated bioprosthetic valves admitted between 09/29/2011 and 12/30/2020 undergoing either redo-SAVR or ViV-TAVR. Exclusion criteria included endocarditis, other concomitant cardiac surgery, or aortic valve re-intervention during the same admission. The primary outcome was 5-year survival. Composite secondary outcomes included major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE; 30-day operative mortality, stroke, or acute myocardial infarction) and major valve event-free survival (congestive heart failure readmission, endocarditis, or aortic valve reintervention). Time-to-event analyses utilized Kaplan-Meier analysis and multivariable Cox proportional hazard modeling.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, 4,699 patients were identified including 1,775 redo-SAVR and 2,924 ViV-TAVR patients. Redo-SAVR patients were younger (median[IQR] 72[68,77] vs 79[73,84]) with less CHF(39.6% vs. 68.8%) and prior CABG (17.9% vs. 32.0%) (all p<0.05). In the propensity-matched cohorts of 1,256 patients each, redo-SAVR had higher MACE (17.4% vs 13.2%, p=0.003), but better major valve event-free (71[62,79] vs 43[38,47] months, p<0.001) and 5-year (62.3% vs 46.7%, p<0.001) survival. After stratification by Charlson Comorbidity Index, the long-term survival benefit persisted in patients of lower (67.6% vs 54.9%, p=0.001) and medium or higher-risk (55.1% vs 36.7%, p<0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Redo-SAVR may have better long-term survival than ViV-TAVR despite greater perioperative morbidity. Clinical trial data is needed to fully inform clinical decision-making regarding degenerated bioprosthetic valve reintervention, particularly for patients with reasonable life expectancy.</p>","PeriodicalId":50976,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Thoracic Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Thoracic Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2025.01.006","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve replacement (ViV-TAVR) is associated with improved perioperative safety compared to redo surgical aortic valve replacement (redo-SAVR), but long-term outcomes remain uncertain. We therefore compare long-term outcomes of ViV-TAVR and redo-SAVR.
Methods: The study included 1:1 propensity-matched Medicare beneficiaries with degenerated bioprosthetic valves admitted between 09/29/2011 and 12/30/2020 undergoing either redo-SAVR or ViV-TAVR. Exclusion criteria included endocarditis, other concomitant cardiac surgery, or aortic valve re-intervention during the same admission. The primary outcome was 5-year survival. Composite secondary outcomes included major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE; 30-day operative mortality, stroke, or acute myocardial infarction) and major valve event-free survival (congestive heart failure readmission, endocarditis, or aortic valve reintervention). Time-to-event analyses utilized Kaplan-Meier analysis and multivariable Cox proportional hazard modeling.
Results: Overall, 4,699 patients were identified including 1,775 redo-SAVR and 2,924 ViV-TAVR patients. Redo-SAVR patients were younger (median[IQR] 72[68,77] vs 79[73,84]) with less CHF(39.6% vs. 68.8%) and prior CABG (17.9% vs. 32.0%) (all p<0.05). In the propensity-matched cohorts of 1,256 patients each, redo-SAVR had higher MACE (17.4% vs 13.2%, p=0.003), but better major valve event-free (71[62,79] vs 43[38,47] months, p<0.001) and 5-year (62.3% vs 46.7%, p<0.001) survival. After stratification by Charlson Comorbidity Index, the long-term survival benefit persisted in patients of lower (67.6% vs 54.9%, p=0.001) and medium or higher-risk (55.1% vs 36.7%, p<0.001).
Conclusions: Redo-SAVR may have better long-term survival than ViV-TAVR despite greater perioperative morbidity. Clinical trial data is needed to fully inform clinical decision-making regarding degenerated bioprosthetic valve reintervention, particularly for patients with reasonable life expectancy.
期刊介绍:
The mission of The Annals of Thoracic Surgery is to promote scholarship in cardiothoracic surgery patient care, clinical practice, research, education, and policy. As the official journal of two of the largest American associations in its specialty, this leading monthly enjoys outstanding editorial leadership and maintains rigorous selection standards.
The Annals of Thoracic Surgery features:
• Full-length original articles on clinical advances, current surgical methods, and controversial topics and techniques
• New Technology articles
• Case reports
• "How-to-do-it" features
• Reviews of current literature
• Supplements on symposia
• Commentary pieces and correspondence
• CME
• Online-only case reports, "how-to-do-its", and images in cardiothoracic surgery.
An authoritative, clinically oriented, comprehensive resource, The Annals of Thoracic Surgery is committed to providing a place for all thoracic surgeons to relate experiences which will help improve patient care.