The Clinical Course of Patients with Atrial Fibrillation and Flutter Admitted to Medical Intensive Care Units

To better understand the clinical course of patients with atrial fibrillation and flutter who are admitted to medi cal intensive care units (ICUs), we retrospectively re viewed the course of patients with either of these rhythms present on admission. Patients with atrial fibril lation and flutter accounted for 10% of the admissions to a combined intensive and coronary care unit over a 5- year period. These patients had an ICU mortality rate of 9.4%; the ICU deaths occurred exclusively in a subgroup of patients (60%) whose arrhythmia was associated with other serious illnesses. The subgroup of patients presenting with atrial fibrillation and flutter only had a benign course; this subgroup included patients in whom alcohol intake contributed to the rhythm disturbance. Complications occurred in 40% of patients and were predicted with multivariate analysis by (1) the presence of alveolar edema on the initial chest roentgenogram; (2) female sex; (3) diastolic blood pressure less than or equal to 95; (4) chest pain lasting more than 2 hours; and (5) ischemia on the presenting electrocardiogram. Prospective application of these criteria may be helpful in deciding which patients could be initially triaged to non-ICU areas, thereby resulting in more efficient ICU use.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement versus surgical valve replacement in intermediate-risk patients: a propensity score analysis

BACKGROUND

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with the SAPIEN 3 valve demonstrates good 30 day clinical outcomes in patients with severe aortic stenosis who are at intermediate risk of surgical mortality. Here we report longer-term data in intermediate-risk patients given SAPIEN 3 TAVR and compare outcomes to those of intermediate-risk patients given surgical aortic valve replacement.

METHODS

In the SAPIEN 3 observational study, 1077 intermediate-risk patients at 51 sites in the USA and Canada were assigned to receive TAVR with the SAPIEN 3 valve [952 [88%] via transfemoral access) between Feb 17, 2014, and Sept 3, 2014. In this population we assessed all-cause mortality and incidence of strokes, re-intervention, and aortic valve regurgitation at 1 year after implantation. Then we compared 1 year outcomes in this population with those for intermediate-risk patients treated with surgical valve replacement in the PARTNER 2A trial between Dec 23, 2011, and Nov 6, 2013, using a prespecified propensity score analysis to account for between-trial differences in baseline characteristics. The clinical events committee and echocardiographic core laboratory methods were the same for both studies. The primary endpoint was the composite of death from any cause, all strokes, and incidence of moderate or severe aortic regurgitation. We did non-inferiority (margin 7·5%) and superiority analyses in propensity score quintiles to calculate pooled weighted proportion differences for outcomes.

FINDINGS

At 1 year follow-up of the SAPIEN 3 observational study, 79 of 1077 patients who initiated the TAVR procedure had died (all-cause mortality 7·4%; 6·5% in the transfemoral access subgroup), and disabling strokes had occurred in 24 (2%), aortic valve re-intervention in six (1%), and moderate or severe paravalvular regurgitation in 13 (2%). In the propensity-score analysis we included 963 patients treated with SAPIEN 3 TAVR and 747 with surgical valve replacement. For the primary composite endpoint of mortality, strokes, and moderate or severe aortic regurgitation, TAVR was both non-inferior (pooled weighted proportion difference of -9·2%; 90% CI -12·4 to -6; p<0·0001) and superior (-9·2%, 95% CI -13·0 to -5·4; p<0·0001) to surgical valve replacement.

INTERPRETATION

TAVR with SAPIEN 3 in intermediate-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis is associated with low mortality, strokes, and regurgitation at 1 year. The propensity score analysis indicates a significant superiority for our composite outcome with TAVR compared with surgery, suggesting that TAVR might be the preferred treatment alternative in intermediate-risk patients.

FUNDING

None.

Transcatheter or Surgical Aortic-Valve Replacement in Intermediate-Risk Patients

BACKGROUND

Previous trials have shown that among high-risk patients with aortic stenosis, survival rates are similar with transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR) and surgical aortic-valve replacement. We evaluated the two procedures in a randomized trial involving intermediate-risk patients.

METHODS

We randomly assigned 2032 intermediate-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis, at 57 centers, to undergo either TAVR or surgical replacement. The primary end point was death from any cause or disabling stroke at 2 years. The primary hypothesis was that TAVR would not be inferior to surgical replacement. Before randomization, patients were entered into one of two cohorts on the basis of clinical and imaging findings; 76.3% of the patients were included in the transfemoral-access cohort and 23.7% in the transthoracic-access cohort.

RESULTS

The rate of death from any cause or disabling stroke was similar in the TAVR group and the surgery group (P=0.001 for noninferiority). At 2 years, the Kaplan-Meier event rates were 19.3% in the TAVR group and 21.1% in the surgery group (hazard ratio in the TAVR group, 0.89; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73 to 1.09; P=0.25). In the transfemoral-access cohort, TAVR resulted in a lower rate of death or disabling stroke than surgery (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.62 to 1.00; P=0.05), whereas in the transthoracic-access cohort, outcomes were similar in the two groups. TAVR resulted in larger aortic-valve areas than did surgery and also resulted in lower rates of acute kidney injury, severe bleeding, and new-onset atrial fibrillation; surgery resulted in fewer major vascular complications and less paravalvular aortic regurgitation.

CONCLUSIONS

In intermediate-risk patients, TAVR was similar to surgical aortic-valve replacement with respect to the primary end point of death or disabling stroke. (Funded by Edwards Lifesciences; PARTNER 2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01314313.).

Early clinical and echocardiographic outcomes after SAPIEN 3 transcatheter aortic valve replacement in inoperable, high-risk and intermediate-risk patients with aortic stenosis

AIMS

Based on randomized trials using first-generation devices, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is well established in the treatment of high-risk (HR) patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS). To date, there is a paucity of adjudicated, prospective data evaluating outcomes with newer generation devices and in lower risk patients. We report early outcomes of a large, multicentre registry of inoperable, HR, and intermediate-risk (IR) patients undergoing treatment with the next-generation SAPIEN 3 transcatheter heart valve (THV).

METHODS AND RESULTS

Patients with severe, symptomatic AS (583 high surgical risk or inoperable and 1078 IR) were enrolled in a multicentre, non-randomized registry at 57 sites in the USA and Canada. All patients received TAVR with the SAPIEN 3 system via transfemoral (n = 1443, 86.9%) and transapical or transaortic (n = 218, 13.1%) access routes. The rate of 30-day all-cause mortality was 2.2% in HR/inoperable patients [mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score 8.7%] and 1.1% in IR patients (mean STS score 5.3%); cardiovascular mortality was 1.4 and 0.9%, respectively. In HR/inoperable patients, the 30-day rate of major/disabling stroke was 0.9%, major bleeding 14.0%, major vascular complications 5.1%, and requirement for permanent pacemaker 13.3%. In IR patients, the 30-day rate of major/disabling stroke was 1.0%, major bleeding 10.6%, major vascular complications 6.1%, and requirement for permanent pacemaker 10.1%. Mean overall Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire score increased from 47.8 to 67.8 (HR/inoperable, P < 0.0001) and 54.7 to 74.0 (IR, P < 0.0001). Overall, paravalvular regurgitation at 30 days was none/trace in 55.9% of patients, mild in 40.7%, moderate in 3.4%, and severe in 0.0%. Mean gradients among patients with paired baseline and 30-day or discharge echocardiograms decreased from 45.8 mmHg at baseline to 11.4 mmHg at 30 days, while aortic valve area increased from 0.69 to 1.67 cm(2).

CONCLUSIONS

The SAPIEN 3 THV system was associated with low rates of 30-day mortality and major/disabling stroke as well as low rates of moderate or severe paravalvular regurgitation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov #NCT01314313.

Echocardiographic determinants of LV functional improvement after transcatheter aortic valve replacement

BACKGROUND

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is an established therapy in high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis. Among patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), it is unclear which patients will derive maximal benefit from TAVR.

METHODS

Clinical and echocardiographic data of patients with severe aortic stenosis and low LVEF (≤50%) who underwent TAVR at a single institution during 2009-2013 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into 2 groups post-TAVR based on improved LV function (Group A = ΔLVEF ≥ 10%) versus persistent LV dysfunction (Group B = ΔLVEF<10%). Echocardiographic parameters were assessed for their association with LVEF change post-TAVR. Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed to generate survival estimates.

RESULTS

Of 382 patients who underwent TAVR, 60 patients had low LVEF, LV function failed to improve ≥10% in 50% of patients following the procedure (Group B). At baseline echocardiograms, Group B had higher LVEF, stroke volume (SV), SV index; and lower E, E/E', and estimated pulmonary arterial systolic pressure (PASP) compared to Group A. Higher mortality was found in Group B compared to the Group A (p = 0.003) with a significantly shorter survival (Group A = 3.3 ± 0.1 years vs Group B = 2.7 ± 0.2 years, p = 0.003). One-year event free survival was 53.3% in Group B compared to 93.3% in Group A, with a stable trend over ensuing years (5-year survival; 53.3% versus 90.0%, p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients undergoing TAVR with depressed LV function, those who failed to improve were more likely to have relatively higher LVEF, SV, and SVI; and lower E, E/E', and PASP at baseline. Mortality rates were found to be higher in persistent LV dysfunction group. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Pulmonary hypertension is a manifestation of congestive heart failure and left ventricular diastolic dysfunction in octogenarians with severe aortic stenosis

Previous studies have suggested that pulmonary hypertension (PH) in severe aortic stenosis (AS) is a risk factor for operative mortality with aortic valve replacement (AVR). Conversely, others have shown that patients with AS and PH extract a large symptomatic and survival benefit from AVR compared with those patients not treated surgically. We sought to evaluate the prevalence, severity, and mechanism of PH in an elderly patient cohort with severe AS. We prospectively evaluated 41 patients aged ≥80 years with severe AS. All patients underwent cardiac catheterization and transthoracic echocardiography within 24 hours. We found that PH was common in this cohort: 32 patients (78%) had PH; however, the predominant mechanism of PH was left heart congestion. Patients with PH had nearly double the pulmonary artery wedge pressure of patients without PH (23 vs. 13 mmHg; P ≤ 0.001). In patients with PH compared with those without, pulmonary vascular resistance was higher yet still under 3 Wood units (WU; 2.9 vs. 1.5 WU; P = 0.001), and the transpulmonary gradient (11 vs. 7 mmHg; P = 0.01) and diastolic pulmonary gradient (DPG; 3.0 vs. 2.7 mmHg; P = 0.74) were in normal range. Left ventricular diastolic abnormalities were more common in patients with severe AS and PH. Right ventricular (RV) dysfunction was common (13/41 patients, 32%), but the PH and non-PH groups had similar tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (2.0 vs. 2.3 cm; P = 0.15). Only 2 subjects had both RV dysfunction and an elevated DPG. In conclusion, PH is common in elderly patients with severe AS. This occurs largely due to left heart congestion, with a relative absence of pulmonary vascular disease and RV dysfunction, and as such, PH may serve as a heart failure equivalent in these patients.

Transcatheter and Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Dialysis Patients: A Propensity-Matched Comparison

BACKGROUND

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) clinical trials in North America excluded patients on dialysis and, consequently, the outcomes of TAVR in dialysis-dependent patients remain unknown.

METHODS

All Medicare fee-for-service patients undergoing TAVR (n = 5,005) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) (n = 32,634) between January 1, 2011, and November 30, 2012, were identified using procedural codes collected by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Dialysis status and comorbidities were identified using diagnosis codes present on arrival for TAVR hospitalization. Patients supported on dialysis who underwent TAVR (n = 224) were compared with non-dialysis patients who underwent TAVR as well as a propensity-matched group of contemporaneous dialysis patients who underwent SAVR (n = 194 pairs).

RESULTS

The TAVR patients on dialysis were younger than non-dialysis TAVR patients (79.2 years vs 84.1 years; p < 0.01) but had higher prevalence of comorbidities. Dialysis TAVR patients had increased mortality at 30 days (13% vs 6%, p < 0.01) and significantly worse survival by Kaplan-Meier analysis. Multivariable regression found dialysis to be independently associated with worse survival (hazard ratio, 1.73; 95% confidence interval, 1.33% to 2.25%, p < 0.01) in TAVR patients. Propensity-matched dialysis SAVR and dialysis TAVR patients had no significant differences in demographic or risk factors. Matched dialysis TAVR patients had shorter length of stay (6 interquartile range, 4 to 10] vs 10 [IQR 7 to 18] days; p < 0.01) and comparable survival.

CONCLUSIONS

TAVR in dialysis patients is associated with decreased survival compared with non-dialysis patients; however, it is comparable with SAVR in high risk dialysis patients based on a propensity-matched comparison.

Outcomes in Nonagenarians Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in the PARTNER-I Trial

BACKGROUND

This study describes short-term and mid-term outcomes of nonagenarian patients undergoing transfemoral or transapical transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in the Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valve (PARTNER)-I trial.

METHODS

From April 2007 to February 2012, 531 nonagenarians, mean age 93 ± 2.1 years, underwent TAVR with a balloon-expandable prosthesis in the PARTNER-I trial: 329 through transfemoral (TF-TAVR) and 202 transapical (TA-TAVR) access. Clinical events were adjudicated and echocardiographic results analyzed in a core laboratory. Quality of life (QoL) data were obtained up to 1 year post-TAVR. Time-varying all-cause mortality was referenced to that of an age-sex-race-matched US population.

RESULTS

For TF-TAVR, post-procedure 30-day stroke risk was 3.6%; major adverse events occurred in 35% of patients; 30-day paravalvular leak was greater than moderate in 1.4%; median post-procedure length of stay (LOS) was 5 days. Thirty-day mortality was 4.0% and 3-year mortality 48% (44% for the matched population). By 6 months, most QoL measures had stabilized at a level considerably better than baseline, with Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) 72 ± 21. For TA-TAVR, post-procedure 30-day stroke risk was 2.0%; major adverse events 32%; 30-day paravalvular leak was greater than moderate in 0.61%; and median post-procedure LOS was 8 days. Thirty-day mortality was 12% and 3-year mortality 54% (42% for the matched population); KCCQ was 73 ± 23.

CONCLUSIONS

A TAVR can be performed in nonagenarians with acceptable short- and mid-term outcomes. Although TF- and TA-TAVR outcomes are not directly comparable, TA-TAVR appears to carry a higher risk of early death without a difference in intermediate-term mortality. Age alone should not preclude referral for TAVR in nonagenarians.

Safety and Procedural Success of Left Atrial Appendage Exclusion With the Lariat Device: A Systematic Review of Published Reports and Analytic Review of the FDA MAUDE Database

IMPORTANCE

The Lariat device has received US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 510(k) clearance for soft-tissue approximation and is being widely used off-label for left atrial appendage (LAA) exclusion. A comprehensive analysis of safety and effectiveness has not been reported.

OBJECTIVES

To perform a systematic review of published literature to assess safety and procedural success, defined as successful closure of the LAA during the index procedure, of the Lariat device. We performed a formal analytic review of the FDA MAUDE (Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience) database to compile adverse event reports from real-world practice with the Lariat.

DATA SOURCES

For the systematic review, PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library were searched from January 2007 through August 2014 to identify all studies reporting use of the Lariat device in 3 or more patients. The FDA MAUDE database was queried for adverse events reports related to Lariat use.

DATA EXTRACTIONS AND SYNTHESIS

Data were abstracted in duplicate by 2 physician reviewers. Events from published literature were pooled using a generic inverse variance weighting with a random effects model. Cumulative and individual adverse events were also reported using the FDA MAUDE data set.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Procedural adverse events and procedural success.

RESULTS

In the systematic review, 5 reports of Lariat device use in 309 participants were identified. Specific complications weighted for inverse of variance of individual studies were urgent need for cardiac surgery (2.3%; 7 of 309 procedures) and death (0.3%; 1 of 309 procedures). Procedural success was 90.3% (279 of 309 procedures). In the FDA MAUDE database, there were 35 unique reports of adverse events with use of the Lariat device. Among these, we identified 5 adverse event reports that noted pericardial effusion and death and an additional 23 reported urgent cardiac surgery without mention of death.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This review of published reports and case reports identified risks of adverse events with off-label use of the Lariat device for LAA exclusion. Formal, controlled investigations into the safety and efficacy of the device for this indication are warranted.

5-year outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement compared with standard treatment for patients with inoperable aortic stenosis (PARTNER 1): a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Based on the early results of the Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves (PARTNER) trial, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is an accepted treatment for patients with severe aortic stenosis who are not suitable for surgery. However, little information is available about the late clinical outcomes in such patients.

METHODS

We did this randomised controlled trial at 21 experienced valve centres in Canada, Germany, and the USA. We enrolled patients with severe symptomatic inoperable aortic stenosis and randomly assigned (1:1) them to transfemoral TAVR or to standard treatment, which often included balloon aortic valvuloplasty. Patients and their treating physicians were not masked to treatment allocation. The randomisation was done centrally, and sites learned of the assignment only after a patient had been screened, consented, and entered into the database. The primary outcome of the trial was all-cause mortality at 1 year in the intention-to-treat population, here we present the prespecified findings after 5 years. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00530894.

FINDINGS

We screened 3015 patients, of whom 358 were enrolled (mean age 83 years, Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality 11·7%, 54% female). 179 were assigned to TAVR treatment and 179 were assigned to standard treatment. 20 patients crossed over from the standard treatment group and ten withdrew from study, leaving only six patients at 5 years, of whom five had aortic valve replacement treatment outside of the study. The risk of all-cause mortality at 5 years was 71·8% in the TAVR group versus 93·6% in the standard treatment group (hazard ratio 0·50, 95% CI 0·39-0·65; p<0·0001). At 5 years, 42 (86%) of 49 survivors in the TAVR group had New York Heart Association class 1 or 2 symptoms compared with three (60%) of five in the standard treatment group. Echocardiography after TAVR showed durable haemodynamic benefit (aortic valve area 1·52 cm(2) at 5 years, mean gradient 10·6 mm Hg at 5 years), with no evidence of structural valve deterioration.

INTERPRETATION

TAVR is more beneficial than standard treatment for treatment of inoperable aortic stenosis. TAVR should be strongly considered for patients who are not surgical candidates for aortic valve replacement to improve their survival and functional status. Appropriate selection of patients will help to maximise the benefit of TAVR and reduce mortality from severe comorbidities.

FUNDING

Edwards Lifesciences.

5-year outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement or surgical aortic valve replacement for high surgical risk patients with aortic stenosis (PARTNER 1): a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves (PARTNER) trial showed that mortality at 1 year, 2 years, and 3 years is much the same with transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for high-risk patients with aortic stenosis. We report here the 5-year outcomes.

METHODS

We did this randomised controlled trial at 25 hospitals, in Canada (two), Germany (one), and the USA (23). We used a computer-generated randomisation sequence to randomly assign high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis to either SAVR or TAVR with a balloon-expandable bovine pericardial tissue valve by either a transfemoral or transapical approach. Patients and their treating physicians were not masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome of the trial was all-cause mortality in the intention-to-treat population at 1 year, we present here predefined outcomes at 5 years. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00530894.

FINDINGS

We screened 3105 patients, of whom 699 were enrolled (348 assigned to TAVR, 351 assigned to SAVR). Overall mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality score was 11·7%. At 5 years, risk of death was 67·8% in the TAVR group compared with 62·4% in the SAVR group (hazard ratio 1·04, 95% CI 0·86-1·24; p=0·76). We recorded no structural valve deterioration requiring surgical valve replacement in either group. Moderate or severe aortic regurgitation occurred in 40 (14%) of 280 patients in the TAVR group and two (1%) of 228 in the SAVR group (p<0·0001), and was associated with increased 5-year risk of mortality in the TAVR group (72·4% for moderate or severe aortic regurgitation vs 56·6% for those with mild aortic regurgitation or less; p=0·003).

INTERPRETATION

Our findings show that TAVR as an alternative to surgery for patients with high surgical risk results in similar clinical outcomes.

FUNDING

Edwards Lifesciences.

Infective endocarditis after transcatheter aortic valve implantation: results from a large multicenter registry

BACKGROUND

We aimed to determine the incidence, predictors, clinical characteristics, management, and outcomes of infective endocarditis (IE) after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI).

METHODS AND RESULTS

This multicenter registry included 53 patients (mean age, 79±8 years; men, 57%) who suffered IE after TAVI of 7944 patients after a mean follow-up of 1.1±1.2 years (incidence, 0.67%, 0.50% within the first year after TAVI). Mean time from TAVI was 6 months (interquartile range, 1-14 months). Orotracheal intubation (hazard ratio, 3.87; 95% confidence interval, 1.55-9.64; P=0.004) and the self-expandable CoreValve system (hazard ratio, 3.12; 95% confidence interval, 1.37-7.14; P=0.007) were associated with IE (multivariate analysis including 3067 patients with individual data). The most frequent causal microorganisms were coagulase-negative staphylococci (24%), followed by Staphylococcus aureus (21%) and enterococci (21%). Vegetations were present in 77% of patients (transcatheter valve leaflets, 39%; stent frame, 17%; mitral valve, 21%). At least 1 complication of IE occurred in 87% of patients (heart failure in 68%). However, only 11% of patients underwent valve intervention (valve explantation and valve-in-valve procedure in 4 and 2 patients, respectively). The mortality rate in hospital was 47.2% and increased to 66% at the 1-year follow-up. IE complications such as heart failure (P=0.037) and septic shock (P=0.002) were associated with increased in-hospital mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of IE at 1 year after TAVI was 0.50%, and the risk increased with the use of orotracheal intubation and a self-expandable valve system. Staphylococci and enterococci were the most common agents. Although most patients presented at least 1 complication of IE, valve intervention was performed in a minority of patients, and nearly half of the patients died during the hospitalization period.

Cardiopulmonary bypass and intra-aortic balloon pump use is associated with higher short and long term mortality after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a PARTNER trial substudy

BACKGROUND

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with the balloon-expandable Sapien transcatheter heart valve improves survival compared to standard therapy in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) and is noninferior to surgical aortic valve replacement (AVR) in patients at high operative risk. Nonetheless, a significant proportion of patients may require pre-emptive or emergent support with cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) and/or intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) during TAVR due to pre-existing comorbid conditions or as a result of procedural complications.

OBJECTIVES

We hypothesized that patients who required CPB or IABP would have increased periprocedural complications and reduced long-term survival. In addition, we sought to determine whether preprocedural variables could predict the need for CPB and IABP.

METHODS

The study population included 2,525 patients in the PARTNER Trial (Cohort A and B) and the continuing access registry (CAR). Patients that received CPB or IABP were compared to patients that did not receive either, and then further divided into those that received support pre-TAVR and those that were placed on support emergently.

RESULTS

One-hundred sixty-three patients (6.5%) were placed on CPB and/or IABP. The use of CPB or IABP was associated with higher 1 year mortality (49.1% vs. 21.6%, P < 0.001). In multivariable analysis, utilization of CPB or IABP was an independent predictor of 30 day (HR 6.95) and 1-year (HR 2.56) mortality. Although mortality was highest in emergent cases, mortality was also greater in planned CPB and IABP cases compared with non-CPB/IABP cases (53.3% and 40.3% vs. 21.6%, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

These findings indicate that CPB and IABP use in TAVR portends a poor prognosis and its utilization, particularly in the setting of pre-emptive use, needs reconsideration.