Cerebral Embolic Protection Devices During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Outcomes and Predictors of Stroke After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in the Cerebral Protection Device Era

BACKGROUND

Studies have shown inconclusive results on the effectiveness of cerebral protection devices (CPDs) with transcatheter aortic valve replacement. We aimed to analyze the national statistics on stroke and other outcomes with CPD use.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The Nationwide Readmissions Database (2017-2020) was queried to obtain data on patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Outcomes were compared between patients with a CPD and patients without a CPD. Of 271 804 patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement, CPD was used in 7.3% of patients. In a multivariable logistic regression analysis, CPD use was not associated with lower overall stroke rates (1.6% versus 1.9% without CPD; odds ratio, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.84-1.07]; P=0.364), but it was significantly associated with lower major stroke rates (1.2% versus 1.5% without CPD; odds ratio, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.74-0.98]; P=0.02). Patients with a CPD also had a shorter length of stay, higher routine discharges to home/self-care (74.9% versus 70.6%), and lower mortality rates (0.7% versus 1.3%). The 30-day (9.6% versus 11.7%) and 180-day (24.6% versus 28.2%) readmission rates were significantly lower in the CPD cohort. Among patients who developed stroke, patients with a CPD had more frequent routine discharges. Prior valve surgery was associated with the highest risk of overall and major stroke.

CONCLUSIONS

CPD use during transcatheter aortic valve replacement was not independently associated with a lower risk of overall stroke but was associated with a lower risk of major stroke in a multivariable model. Data from future randomized trials that may offset any potential confounders in our study are required to help identify patients who would benefit from the use of these devices.

Impact of carotid artery stenosis on outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Carotid Artery Stenosis (CAS) is common in elderly patients undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement (TAVR). However, the impact of CAS on the outcomes of TAVR is unclear.

PURPOSE

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the clinical and periprocedural outcomes in patients with and without CAS undergoing TAVR.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched until February 2023. We included studies that performed a direct comparison of outcomes of TAVR in CAS versus non-CAS patients. Data was extracted from published reports and the ROBINS-I tool was utilized for quality assessment. The R studio software (version 4.2.2) was adopted for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

Five observational studies and 111.915 patients were included. The mean age was 80.7 ± 8.2 years and 46.3% were female. The risk of stroke or transient ischemic attack was elevated in the group of patients with CAS (OR 1.44; 95% CI 1.07-1.95; p = 0.016). In contrast, myocardial infarction (OR 1.24; 95% CI 1.05-1.47; p = 0.074) and all-cause mortality (OR 0.99; 95% CI 0.73-1.35; p = 0.95) were not significantly different between CAS and non-CAS groups. Acute kidney injury and new pacemaker implantation did not differ between patients with and without CAS.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that CAS is significantly associated with cerebrovascular events in patients undergoing TAVR, without significantly impacting all-cause mortality. Further prospective studies are needed for a more granular assessment of additional determinants of this association, such as unilateral vs. bilateral involvement and whether there is a threshold of CAS severity for increased risk.