Midterm Survival of Low‐Risk Patients Treated With Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement: Meta‐Analysis of Reconstructed Time‐to‐Event Data

Author:

Sá Michel Pompeu12ORCID,Jacquemyn Xander3ORCID,Van den Eynde Jef3ORCID,Serna‐Gallegos Derek12ORCID,Chu Danny12ORCID,Clavel Marie‐Annick45ORCID,Pibarot Philippe45ORCID,Sultan Ibrahim45ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery University of Pittsburgh PA USA

2. UPMC Heart and Vascular Institute University of Pittsburgh Medical Center Pittsburgh PA USA

3. Department of Cardiovascular Sciences KU Leuven Leuven Belgium

4. Centre de Recherche de l’Institut Universitaire de Cardiologie et de Pneumologie de Québec Québec City Québec Canada

5. Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine Université Laval Québec City Québec Canada

Abstract

Background We performed a meta‐analysis of reconstructed time‐to‐event data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and propensity‐score matched (PSM) studies comparing transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement (TAVR versus SAVR) to evaluate midterm outcomes in patients considered low risk for SAVR. Methods and Results Study‐level meta‐analysis of reconstructed time‐to‐event data from Kaplan–Meier curves of RCTs and PSM studies published by December 31, 2022 was conducted. Eight studies (3 RCTs, 5 PSM studies) met our eligibility criteria and included 5444 patients; 2639 patients underwent TAVR, and 2805 patients underwent SAVR. TAVR showed a higher risk of all‐cause mortality at 8 years of follow‐up (hazard ratio [HR] 1.22, [95% CI, 1.03–1.43], P =0.018). Up to 2 years of follow‐up, TAVR was not inferior to SAVR (HR, 1.08 [95% CI, 0.89–1.31], P =0.448); however, we observed a statistically significant difference after 2 years with higher mortality with TAVR (HR, 1.51 [95% CI, 1.14–2.00]; P =0.004). This difference was driven by PSM studies; our sensitivity analysis showed a statistically significant difference between TAVR and SAVR when we included only PSM studies (HR, 1.41 [95% CI, 1.16–1.72], P =0.001) but no statistically significant difference when we included only RCTs (HR, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.69–1.16], P =0.398). Conclusions In comparison with TAVR, SAVR appeared to be associated with improved survival beyond 2 years in low‐risk patients. However, the survival benefit of SAVR was observed only in PSM studies and not in RCTs. The addition of data from ongoing RCTs as well as longer follow‐up in previous RCTs will help to confirm if there is a difference in mid‐ and long‐term survival between TAVR versus SAVR in the low‐risk population.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cited by 13 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3