Currently, there is no preference for surgical (SAVR) vs transcatheter (TAVR) aortic valve replacement in patients with low ejection fraction (EF). The present study retrospectively compared the outcomes of SAVR vs TAVR in patients with EF ≤40% (70 SAVR and 117 TAVR patients). Study outcomes were survival and the composite endpoint of stroke, aortic valve reintervention, and heart failure readmission. The patients who had TAVR were older (median: 75 (25-75th percentiles: 69-81) vs 51 (39-66) years old; P < .001) with higher EuroSCORE II (4.95 (2.99-9.85) vs 2 (1.5-3.25); P < .001). Postoperative renal impairment was more common with SAVR (8 (12.5%) vs 4 (3.42%); P = .03), and they had longer hospital stay [9 (7-15) vs 4 (2-8) days; P < .001). There was no difference between groups in stroke, reintervention, and readmission (Sub-distributional Hazard ratio: .95 (.37-2.45); P = .92). Survival at 1 and 5 years was 95% and 91% with SAVR and 89% and 63% with TAVR. Adjusted survival was comparable between groups. EF improved significantly (β: .28 (.23-.33); P < 0.001) with no difference between groups (P = .85). In conclusion, TAVR could be as safe as SAVR in patients with low EF.
HalkosMEChenEPSarinEL, et al.Aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis in patients with left ventricular dysfunction. Ann Thorac Surg. 2009;88:746-751.
2.
PaiRGVaradarajanPRazzoukA. Survival benefit of aortic valve replacement in patients with severe aortic stenosis with low ejection fraction and low gradient with normal ejection fraction. Ann Thorac Surg. 2008;86:1781-1789.
3.
ConrottoFD’AscenzoFStellaP, et al.Transcatheter aortic valve implantation in low ejection fraction/low transvalvular gradient patients: the rule of 40. J Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown). 2017;18:103-108.
4.
MaesFLerakisSBarbosa RibeiroH, et al.Outcomes from transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients with low-flow, low-gradient aortic stenosis and left ventricular ejection fraction less than 30%: A substudy from the TOPAS-TAVI Registry. JAMA Cardiol. 2019;4:64-70.
5.
NashefSAMRoquesFSharplesLD, et al.EuroSCORE II. Eur J Cardio Thorac Surg. 2012;41:734–745.
6.
EzekowitzJAO’MearaEMcDonaldMA, et al.2017 comprehensive update of the canadian cardiovascular society guidelines for the management of heart failure. Can J Cardiol. 2017;33:1342-1433.
7.
LamCSPSolomonSD. Classification of heart failure according to ejection fraction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2021;77:3217-3225.
8.
ThygesenKAlpertJSWhiteHD. Universal definition of myocardial infarction. Eur Heart J. 2007;28:2525-2538.
9.
LeveyASEckardtK-UTsukamotoY, et al.Definition and classification of chronic kidney disease: a position statement from Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO). Kidney Int. 2005;67:2089-2100.
10.
PieriMBellettiAMonacoF, et al.Outcome of cardiac surgery in patients with low preoperative ejection fraction. BMC Anesthesiol. 2016;16:97.
11.
ArafatAAHassanEAlfonsoJJ, et al.Del Nido versus warm blood cardioplegia in adult patients with a low ejection fraction. Cardiothorac Surg. 2021;29:24.
12.
HannanELSamadashviliZLaheySJ, et al.Aortic valve replacement for patients with severe aortic stenosis: risk factors and their impact on 30-month mortality. Ann Thorac Surg. 2009; 87:1741-1749.
13.
SantanaOXydasSWilliamsRF, et al.Aortic valve replacement in patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35% performed via a minimally invasive right thoracotomy. J Thorac Dis. 2017;9(suppl 7):S607-S613.
14.
Flores-MarínAGómez-DoblasJJCaballero-BorregoJ, et al.Long-term predictors of mortality and functional recovery after aortic valve replacement for severe aortic stenosis with left ventricular dysfunction. Rev Esp Cardiol. 2010;63:36-45.
15.
MackMJLeonMBThouraniVH, et al.Transcatheter aortic-valve replacement with a balloon-expandable valve in low-risk patients. N Engl J Med. 2019;380:1695-1705.
16.
TamburinoCCapodannoDRamondoA, et al.Incidence and predictors of early and late mortality after transcatheter aortic valve implantation in 663 patients with severe aortic stenosis. Circulation. 2011;123:299-308.
17.
UrenaMWebbJGEltchaninoffH, et al.Late cardiac death in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement: incidence and predictors of advanced heart failure and sudden cardiac death. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;65:437-448.
18.
ElmariahSPalaciosIFMcAndrewTet al.Outcomes of transcatheter and surgical aortic valve replacement in high-risk patients with aortic stenosis and left ventricular dysfunction: results from the Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves (PARTNER) trial (cohort A). Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2013;6:604-614.
19.
Ziv-BaranTZelmanRBDombrowskiP, et al.Surgical versus trans-catheter aortic valve replacement (SAVR vs. TAVR) in patients with aortic stenosis: Experience in a community hospital. Medicine (Baltimore). 2019;98:e17915.
20.
NagarajaVRavalJEslickGDOngATL. Transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised and non-randomised trials. Open Hear. 2014;1:e000013.
21.
FuJPopalMSLiY, et al.Transcatheter versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Low and Intermediate Risk Patients with Severe Aortic Stenosis: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials and Propensity Score Matching Observational Studies. J Thorac Dis. 2019;11(5):1945-1962.
22.
RobiolioPARigolinVHHearneSE, et al.Left ventricular performance improves late after aortic valve replacement in patients with aortic stenosis and reduced ejection fraction. Am J Cardiol. 1995;76:612-615.
23.
UneDMesanaLChanV, et al.Clinical impact of changes in left ventricular function after aortic valve replacement: analysis from 3112 patients. Circulation. 2015;132:741-747.
24.
KilicaslanBUnalBCoskunMS, et al.Post transcatheter aortic valve replacement ejection fraction response is predictor of survival among patients with whole range of systolic dysfunction. Acta Cardiol. 2021;76:475-485.
25.
CarapinhaJLAl-OmarHAAlqoofiF, et al.Budget impact analysis of transcatheter aortic valve replacement in low, intermediate, and high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis in Saudi Arabia. J Med Econ. 2022;25:77-86.
