Clinical profile, treatment assignment and clinical outcome of patients with severe aortic stenosis not eligible to participate in a clinical trial of percutaneous aortic valve replacement

Temporal trends in patient referral for Transcatheter aortic valve replacement and reasons for exclusion at a high-volume Center in the United States

BACKGROUND

Clinical indications for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and elements of the implantation procedure, including delivery system miniaturization and novel access options, have evolved over time. The reasons patients are excluded from TAVR also have changed. The impact of these changes on patient referral for and exclusion from TAVR is unknown.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed patients referred to our center for TAVR from January 2010 to August 2016 to evaluate reasons for patient exclusion. Patients were divided into three groups based on initial screening date for trends in demographics and exclusion: Group 1, 2010-2012; Group 2, 2012-2014; Group 3, 2014 to August 1, 2016. Annual trends for patient exclusion from TAVR were assessed.

RESULTS

One thousand nine hundred fifty-three patients were referred and underwent screening for TAVR. The rates at which patients were referred for TAVR were 23.8, 25.9, and 24.5 per month in groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Rate of patient exclusion from TAVR decreased from 68% in Group 1 to 38% in Group 3 (P < .001). The largest percentage of patients (29.4%) were initially excluded from TAVR for cardiac reasons, but this trend has decreased over time. Twenty-five percent are excluded for lack of procedural indication. Exclusion from TAVR for vascular access reasons decreased from 7.9% in 2010 to 1.0% in 2016 (P = .017).

CONCLUSIONS

Referral numbers have been robust since TAVR became available. The percentage of patients excluded from TAVR has decreased over time. Patients are most commonly excluded from TAVR for concomitant coronary artery disease (CAD), asymptomatic severe AS, moderate AS, or non-cardiac critical illness. Patients with CAD and those with asymptomatic severe AS or moderate AS should be a focus for continued research in TAVR.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement: establishing a comprehensive program model for hybrid cardiac catheterization laboratories in the Department of Veterans Affairs

Aortic valve disease, especially aortic stenosis, becomes progressively debilitating and carries a high mortality risk if it is categorized as severe and symptomatic (J Thorac Cardiovas Surg. 2012;144(3):e29-e84). In the past, the only treatment for aortic stenosis was surgical aortic valve replacement. Surgical treatment may require several hours of cardioplegia, and if the patient has comorbidities, such as renal failure or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, their operative mortality percentage increases.In 2011, the US Food and Drug Administration approved the use of a transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) procedure for patients who were deemed high risk or inoperative for the routine surgical aortic valve replacement surgery. More than 20, 000 TAVRs have been performed in patients worldwide since 2002 when Dr Alain Cribier performed the first-in-man TAVR (Arch Cardiovasc Dis. 2012;105(3):145-152). The Edwards Lifesciences SAPIEN XT valve and the Medtronic CoreValve are commercially available.The clinical findings and economic statistic have supported the expansion of the TAVR procedure. However, there has been considerable controversy over where the procedure is to occur and who is directly responsible for directing the TAVR care. This debate has identified barriers to the implementation of a TAVR program. The operating rooms and a cardiac catheterization laboratory are underprepared for the hybrid valve replacement therapy. Because of the barriers identified, the Department of Veterans Affairs determined a need for a systematic approach to review the programs that applied for this structural heart disease program. A centralized team was developed to ensure room readiness and staff competency. The use of the Health Failure Mode and Effects Analysis can define high-risk clinical processes and conduct a hazard analysis. Worksheets can show potential failure modes and their probabilities, along with actions and outcome measures, team collaboration, extensive screening, and selection process. The TAVR program begins implementation with data entry with each case into CART-CL (Cardiovascular Assessment, Reporting and Tracking System for Cath Labs, Veteran Administration database for interventional cardiology procedures). If an untoward event occurs, within 24 hours the CART-CL Quality Assessment Team is activated to begin the review process. This provides real-time review and feedback to the local facility in an expeditious manner. Cardiac catheterization laboratories have been inundated with rapidly changing technological advances in the past decade. The era for structural heart repair is rapidly mobilizing from a surgical/operating room setting to a transcatheter/hybrid catheterization laboratory suite. The use of the new hybrid catheterization laboratories will continue to expand as the approval of future transcatheter therapies evolve. Editor's note: Due to the volume of important information presented in each table, only the first table is included in the print version of the article, however, all tables may be viewed in their entirety free of charge on the online version of this article: http://journals.lww.com/dccnjournal/pages/default.aspx.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in nonsurgical candidates with severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis: a cost-effectiveness analysis

BACKGROUND

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) seems to improve the survival and quality of life of patients with aortic stenosis ineligible for surgical aortic valve replacement.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We used a decision analytic Markov model to estimate lifetime costs and benefits in a hypothetical cohort of patients with severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis who were ineligible for surgical aortic valve replacement. The model compared transfemoral TAVR with medical management and was calibrated to the Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves (PARTNER) trial. TAVR increased life expectancy from 2.08 to 2.93 years and quality-adjusted life expectancy from 1.19 to 1.93 years. TAVR also reduced subsequent hospitalizations by 1.40 but increased complications, particularly stroke (from 1% to 11% lifetime risk), and also increased lifetime costs from $83,600 to $169,100. The incremental cost-effectiveness of TAVR was $116,500 per quality-adjusted life-year gained ($99,900 per life-year gained). Results were robust to reasonable changes in individual variables but were sensitive to the level of annual healthcare costs caused by noncardiac diseases and to the projected life expectancy of medically treated patients.

CONCLUSIONS

TAVR seems to be an effective but somewhat expensive alternative to medical management among patients with symptomatic aortic stenosis ineligible for surgery. TAVR is more cost-effective for patients with a lower burden of noncardiac disease.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation in end-stage renal disease

Valvular heart disease is common in patients with end-stage renal disease and, if symptomatic, may lead to valve replacement surgery. However, some patients with renal failure are deemed unsuitable for cardiac surgery, and in those patients who do undergo surgery, there is a significantly greater morbidity and mortality. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is recognized as an option for high-risk patients with symptomatic aortic stenosis (AS). Here we describe two patients on haemodialysis who underwent TAVI with satisfactory outcomes. The role of TAVI is evolving and has the potential to play an important role for dialysis patients with AS.