Is There a Place for Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Aortic Stenosis and Previous Coronary Bypass Grafting?

Propensity matched comparison of in-hospital outcomes of TAVR vs. SAVR in patients with previous history of CABG: Insights from the Nationwide inpatient sample

BACKGROUND

The incidence of patients with previous history of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) presenting for aortic valvular replacement has been consistently on the rise. Repeat sternotomy for surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) carries an inherent risk of morbidity and mortality when compared to Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).

METHODS

The Nationwide inpatient sample (NIS) from 2012 to 2014 was queried using the International Classification of Diseases-Ninth edition, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) codes to identify all patients ≥ 18 years with prior CABG who underwent TAVR (35.05 and 35.06) or SAVR (35.21 and 35.22). Propensity score matching (1:1) was performed and in-hospital outcomes were compared between matched cohorts.

RESULTS

From 2012 to 2014, there was progressive increase in the annual number of TAVR procedures from 1485 to 4020, with a decrease in patients undergoing SAVR from 2330 to 1955 (P_trend  < 0.0001) in the above population. There was no significant difference in in-hospital mortality rates. Compared to SAVR, TAVR was associated with lower risk of stroke (1.2% vs. 3.3%, P = 0.009), AKI (12.9% vs. 21.3%, P < 0.0001), myocardial infarction (0.9% vs. 2.7%, P = 0.01) and major bleeding (9.1% vs. 25.1%, P < 0.0001). TAVR was associated with higher risk of pacemaker implants (9.6% vs. 4.9%, P = 0.001) and trend toward lower risk of vascular complications (2.3% vs. 4.1%, P = 0.05).

CONCLUSION

In this large cohort of patients with previous CABG, there is no significant difference in in-hospital mortality between TAVR and SAVR. TAVR was associated with lower risk of in-hospital outcomes.