Comparison of Hospital Outcome of Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Diabetes Mellitus (from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample)

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement (TAVR) Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement (SAVR): A Review on the Length of Stay, Cost, Comorbidities, and Procedural Complications

This review provides an in-depth analysis of the effect of length of stay (LOS), comorbidities, and procedural complications on the cost-effectiveness of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in comparison to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). We found that the average LOS was shorter for patients undergoing TAVR, contributing to lower average costs associated with the procedure, although the LOS varied between patients due to the severity of illness and comorbidities present. TAVR has also been found to improve the quality of life for patients receiving aortic valve replacement compared to SAVR. Although TAVR has a lower rate of most post-operative complications caused by SAVR, such as bleeding and cardiac complications, TAVR shows an increased rate of permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation due to mechanical trauma on the heart's conduction system. In addition, our findings suggest that the cost-effectiveness of each procedure varies based on the types of valve, the patient history of other medical conditions, and the procedural methods. Our findings show that TAVR is preferred over SAVR in terms of cost-effectiveness across a variety of patients with other coexisting medical conditions, including cancer, advanced kidney disease, cirrhosis, diabetes mellitus, and bundle branch block. TAVR also appears to be superior to SAVR with fewer post-operative complications. However, TAVR appears to have a higher rate of PPM implantation rates as compared to SAVR. The comorbidities of the valve recipient must be considered when deciding whether to use TAVR or SAVR as cost-effectiveness varies with the patient background.

Racial Disparity Among Patients Undergoing Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement and Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in the United States

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has emerged as a minimally invasive alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). However, racial disparities in the utilization of TAVR persist. This meta-analysis attempts to determine whether the prevalence of adverse outcomes (procedure-related complications) represent barriers to the use of TAVR among African Americans (AA). The TAVR cohort consisted of 89.6% Caucasian (C) and 4.7% AA, while the SAVR cohort included 86.9% C and 6.4% AA. The utilization rate (UR) of TAVR was 1.48 and .35 among C and AA, respectively, while the UR of SAVR was 1.44 and .48 among C and AA, respectively. Following TAVR, for AA the odds ratio (OR) was greater for stroke (OR = 1.22, P = .02) and transient ischemic attack (TIA) (OR = 1.57, P < .001) and lower for undergoing the insertion of a permanent pacemaker (OR = .81, P < .001). While there was a significant difference between C and AA in TAVR and SAVR utilization, outcomes between groups following TAVR are comparable; therefore, adverse outcomes do not appear to be a barrier to the use of TAVR among eligible AA.

Trends and Outcomes of Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Diabetes in the US

Aims

We aimed to assess the trend and outcome of aortic valve replacement in patients with diabetes.

Background

Diabetes is associated with higher cardiovascular events.

Methods

Data from the National Inpatient Sample was analyzed between 2012 and 2017. We compared hospitalizations and in-hospital cardiovascular outcomes in patients with diabetes to those without diabetes, hospitalized for aortic valve replacement.

Results

In diabetes patients undergoing TAVR, the mean age of participants decreased from 79.6 ± 8 to 67.8 ± 8, hospitalizations increased from 0.97 to 7.68/100,000 US adults (p &lt; 0.002 for both). There was a significant temporal decrease in mortality, acute renal failure (ARF), and stroke. Compared to non-diabetic patients, those with diabetes had a higher risk of stroke, ARF, and pacemaker requirement [adjusted OR = 1.174 (1.03–1.34), 1.294 (1.24–1.35), 1.153 (1.11–1.20), respectively], but a similar adjusted mortality risk. In diabetes patients undergoing sAVR, the mean age of participants decreased from 70.4 ± 10 to 68 ± 9 (p &lt; 0.001), hospitalizations dropped from 7.72 to 6.63/100,000 US adults (p = 0.025), so did mortality, bleeding, and ARF. When compared to non-diabetes patients, those with diabetes were older and had a higher adjusted risk of mortality, stroke, and ARF [adjusted OR= 1.115 (1.06–1.17), 1.140 (1.05–1.23), 1.217 (1.18–1.26); respectively].

Conclusion

The recent temporal trend of aortic valve replacement in patients with diabetes shows a significant increase in TAVR coupled with a decrease in sAVR. Mortality and other cardiovascular outcomes decreased in both techniques. sAVR, but not TAVR, was associated with higher in-hospital mortality risk.

Towards Personalized Therapy of Aortic Stenosis

Calcific aortic stenosis (CAS) is the most common cause of acquired valvular heart disease in adults with no available pharmacological treatment to inhibit the disease progression to date. This review provides an up-to-date overview of current knowledge of molecular mechanisms underlying CAS pathobiology and the related treatment pathways. Particular attention is paid to current randomized trials investigating medical treatment of CAS, including strategies based on lipid-lowering and antihypertensive therapies, phosphate and calcium metabolism, and novel therapeutic targets such as valvular oxidative stress, coagulation proteins, matrix metalloproteinases, and accumulation of advanced glycation end products.

Assessment of independent clinical predictors of early readmission after percutaneous endoluminal left atrial appendage closure with the Watchman device using National Readmission Database

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous endoluminal left atrial appendage closure (pLAAC) procedure has been used to prevent strokes in patients who are not eligible for long-term prophylactic anticoagulation. Since its approval, multiple studies have looked at its efficacy with comparable outcomes to anticoagulation, the current standard of care.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the readmission rate and determine the factors associated with readmission after the endocardial pLAAC procedure using the Watchman device.

METHODS

Data was obtained from the National Readmission Database (NRD), and we used SPSS software to determine statistically significant clinical predictors affecting readmission after implantation of the Watchman device at 30 days.

RESULTS

The rate of readmission was found to be 9.2%. The true median cost of index hospitalization for the total population in the study was found to be [median (interquartile range = IQR), p] USD 24594 (USD 18883-31,041), whereas the true median cost of admission for those who were getting readmitted after 30 days was [median (IQR)] USD 7699 (USD 4955-14,243). Multivariate analysis of all clinically relevant predictors showed adjusted ratio for [adjusted odds ratio (OR), 95% confidence interval (95% CI), p-value] female genders (1.288, 1.104-1.503, p = 0.001), discharge to home health care (6.155, 1.509-25.096, p = 0.01), chronic kidney disease (CKD) (1.847,1.511-2.258, p < 0.001), chronic lung disease (1.419, 1.194-1.686, p < 0.001), heart failure (1.280, 1.040-1.574, p = 0.02), pericardial disorders (1.485, 1.011-2.179, p = 0.04), fluid and electrolyte disorders (1.456,1.050-2.018, p = 0.02) in those who were getting readmitted at 30-days compared to those who were not readmitted. The median length of stay for the index hospitalization was found to be one day, whereas the median length of stay at the 30-day readmission was reported to be [Median (IQR)] 4 days (2-6 days). Major cardiac reasons for readmission were heart failure, arrhythmias, and pericardial disorders.

CONCLUSION

Our study aims to assess 30-day outcomes in the US population after pLAAC using a Watchman device. Our analysis showed that one in ten patients were getting readmitted. In addition, chronic kidney disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, heart failure, and pericardial disorders were associated with higher readmission rates. These findings will help us assess clinical correlations and predict which patients are more at risk of readmission after a Watchman procedure.

Analysis of the Changing Economics of US Hospital Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Programs

New technologies in medicine, even if they are promising medically, are often expensive and logistically difficult to implement at the hospital level. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a model technology that is revolutionary in treating aortic stenosis, but has been plagued with significant challenges with financial sustainability. In this article, a margin analysis at the hospital level was performed using literature data. A TAVR industry analysis was performed using Porter's Five Forces framework. The data indicate that TAVR is more expensive than surgical aortic valve replacement, although the cost of TAVR is declining with the use of an optimized minimalist protocol. The overall industry is growing as its clinical indications expand, and it will likely undergo significant reduction of costs when new valves enter the US market. As such, TAVR is a growing industry, with financial sustainability currently dependent on operational efficiency. A concluding list of specific program interventions is provided to help TAVR programs improve operational efficiency and clinical outcomes, as well as help decide whether to create, expand, or redirect funding for TAVR programs. Importantly, the frameworks used to analyze this rapidly evolving technology can be applied to other new technologies to determine financial sustainability.

Current Society of Thoracic Surgeons Model Reclassifies Mortality Risk in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

BACKGROUND

The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) scores are used to screen patients for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). The STS scores were also used to risk stratify patients in major TAVR trials. This study evaluates the reclassification of predicted risk of mortality by the currently available online STS score calculator compared with the 2008 STS risk model in patients undergoing TAVR.

METHODS AND RESULTS

All patients who underwent TAVR from 2006 to 2016 were included in the study. The STS scores for all included patients were calculated by applying the 2008 STS risk model and again using the current STS online calculator. Among 1209 patients who underwent TAVR, 30-day mortality was 27 (2.2%). The overall predicted risk of mortality estimated by using the current online STS risk calculator was significantly lower than the 2008 STS risk model (6.3±4.4 vs 7.3±4.9; P<0.001). A total of 235 (19%) patients were reclassified into a lower risk category per the current STS risk model. In a multivariable logistic regression analysis, patients with persistent atrial fibrillation (odds ratio, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.0-1.9; P=0.03), chronic heart failure (odds ratio, 6.0; 95% CI, 3.8-10.1; P<0.001), and New York Heart Association class IV heart failure (odds ratio, 2.4; 95% CI, 1.3-4.4; P=0.007) were more likely to be reclassified into a lower risk category per the current STS risk model.

CONCLUSIONS

The current STS calculation method produces significantly lower predicted risk of mortality than the 2008 calculator, more pronounced in patients with certain comorbid conditions. These results should be considered while evaluating data from prior studies of TAVR.

Aortic stenosis and diabetes mellitus: An ominous combination

Aortic stenosis and diabetes mellitus are both progressive diseases which, if left untreated, result in significant morbidity and mortality. There is evidence that the prevalence of diabetes is substantially increased in patients with aortic stenosis and those with diabetes have increased rates of progression from mild to severe aortic stenosis. There are good data supporting the hypothesis that aortic stenosis and diabetes mellitus are associated with diabetes mellitus being detrimental towards the quality of life and survival of patients. Thus, a thorough understanding of the pathogenesis of both of these disease processes and the relationship between them aids in designing appropriate preventive and therapeutic approaches. This review aims to give a comprehensive and up-to-date insight into the influence of diabetes mellitus on patients with degenerative aortic stenosis, as well as the prognosis and therapeutic approach to these patients.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation and surgical aortic valve replacement among hospitalized patients with and without type 2 diabetes mellitus in Spain (2014-2015)

Background

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is strongly related to the in-hospital and short-term prognosis in patients with cardiovascular diseases needing surgical or invasive interventions. How T2DM might influence the treatment of aortic stenosis (AS) has not been completely elucidated for surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) or transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). The aims of this study were: (1) to describe the use of aortic valve replacement procedures (TAVI and SAVR) among hospitalized patients with and without T2DM; and (2) to identify factors associated with in hospital mortality (IHM) among patients undergoing these procedures.

Methods

We analyzed data from the Spanish National Hospital Discharge Database between January 1, 2014 and December 31, 2015 for patients aged ≥ 40 years. We selected patients whose medical procedures included TAVI (ICD-9-CM codes 35.05, 35.06) and SAVR (ICD-9-CM codes 35.21, 35.22). We stratified each cohort by diabetes status: T2DM (ICD-9-CM codes 250.x0, 250.x2) and no diabetes. We retrieved data about specific comorbidities, risk factors, procedures, and specific in-hospital postoperative complications. Hospital outcome variables included IHM, and length of hospital stay (LOHS).

Results

We identified a total of 2141 and 16,013 patients who underwent TAVI (n = 715; 33.39% with T2DM) and SAVR (n = 4057; 25.33% with T2DM). In patients who underwent TAVI we found no differences in IHM (3.64% in T2DM vs. 5.12% in non-T2DM, p = 0.603). In the cohort of SAVR, mean LOHS was significantly lower in patients with T2DM than in non-diabetic patients (13.77 vs. 17.27 days). IHM was lower in patients with T2DM (4.36% vs. 6.31%, p < 0.01). After multivariable adjustment for both procedures, patients with T2DM had significantly lower IHM than patients without diabetes (adjusted OR 0.60; IC 95% 0.37–0.99 for TAVI and adjusted OR 0.80; IC 95% 0.66-0-96 for SAVR).

Conclusions

T2DM diabetic patients with AS undergoing a valvular replacement procedure through SAVR or TAVI did not have a worse prognosis compared to non-diabetic patients during hospitalization, showing lower IHM after multivariable adjustment. However, given the limitations of administrative data more prospective studies and clinical trials aimed at evaluating the influence of these procedures in diabetic patients with AS are needed.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12933-017-0631-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.