Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease: A Meta-Analysis

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation versus surgical aortic valve replacement in chronic kidney disease: Meta-analysis of reconstructed time-to-event data

BACKGROUND

Patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) are a challenging and understudied population. Specifically, the late outcomes following surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) or transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in patients with CKD remains uncertain.

OBJECTIVES

To compare overall mortality risk in patients with moderate-to-severe CKD following TAVI versus SAVR.

METHODS

Study-level meta-analysis of reconstructed time-to-event data from Kaplan-Meier curves of studies published by August 2022.

RESULTS

Nine studies met our inclusion criteria. Patients who underwent TAVI had a higher 5-year mortality compared with patients undergoing SAVR in the overall population (HR 1.56, 95% CI 1.44-1.69, P < 0.001) and in populations with similar risk scores (HR 1.15, 95% CI 1.01-1.31, P = 0.035). The landmark analysis revealed a lower risk of 30-day mortality with TAVI (HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.41-0.94, P = 0.023), followed by similar risk until 7.5 months (HR 1, 95% CI 0.78-1.27, P = 0.978). In contrast, the landmark analysis beyond 7.5 months yielded a reversal of the HR in favor of SAVR (TAVI with HR 1.27, 95% CI 1.08-1.49 P = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with CKD, TAVI provides an initial survival benefit over SAVR. However, in the long run, a significant survival benefit of SAVR over TAVI was observed. Our findings highlight the need for randomized controlled trials to investigate outcomes in this special population.

The evolution of TAVI performance overtime: an overview of systematic reviews

BACKGROUND

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a well-established treatment for high and intermediate-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS). Recent studies have demonstrated non-inferiority of TAVI compared to surgery in low-risk patients. In the past decade, numerous literature reviews (SLRs) have assessed the use of TAVI in different risk groups. This is the first attempt to provide an overview of SRs (OoSRs) focusing on secondary studies reporting clinical outcomes/process indicators. This research aims to summarize the findings of extant literature on the performance of TAVI over time.

METHODS

A literature search took place from inception to April 2024. We searched MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library for SLRs. SLRs reporting at least one review of clinical indicators were included. Subsequently, a two-step inclusion process was conducted: [1] screening based on title and abstracts and [2] screening based on full-text papers. Relevant data were extracted and the quality of the reviews was assessed.

RESULTS

We included 33 SLRs with different risks assessed via the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score. Mortality rates were comparable between TAVI and Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement (SAVR) groups. TAVI is associated with lower rates of major bleeding, acute kidney injury (AKI) incidence, and new-onset atrial fibrillation. Vascular complications, pacemaker implantation, and residual aortic regurgitation were more frequent in TAVI patients.

CONCLUSION

This study summarizes TAVI performance findings over a decade, revealing a shift to include both high and low-risk patients since 2020. Overall, TAVI continues to evolve, emphasizing improved outcomes, broader indications, and addressing challenges.

Implications of Renal Disease in Patients Undergoing Structural Interventions

Percutaneous structural interventions have a major impact on the morbidity, mortality, and quality of life of patients by providing a lower-risk alternative to cardiac surgery. However, renal disease has a significant impact on outcomes of these interventions. This review explores the incidence, outcomes, pathophysiology, and preventative measures of acute kidney injury and chronic kidney disease on transcatheter aortic valve replacement, transcatheter mitral valve repair, and percutaneous balloon mitral valvuloplasty. Given the expanding indications for percutaneous structural interventions, further research is needed to identify ideal patients with chronic kidney disease or end-stage renal disease who would benefit from intervention.

Propensity matched comparison of TAVI and SAVR in intermediate-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis and moderate-to-severe chronic kidney disease: a subgroup analysis from the German Aortic Valve Registry

OBJECTIVE

We compared TAVI vs. SAVR in patients with moderate-to-severe chronic kidney disease (eGFR 15-60 ml/min/1.73 m2) for whom both procedures could possibly be considered (age ≤ 80 years, STS-score 4-8).

BACKGROUND

According to both ACC/AHA and ESC/EACTS recent guidelines, aortic stenosis may be treated with either transcatheter (TAVI) or surgical (SAVR) aortic valve replacement in a subgroup of patients. A shared therapeutic decision is made by a heart team based on individual factors, including chronic kidney disease (CKD).

METHODS

Data from the large nationwide German Aortic Valve Registry were used. A propensity score method was used to select 704 TAVI and 374 SAVR matched patients. Primary endpoint was 1-year survival. Secondary endpoints were clinical complications, including pacemaker implantation, vascular complications, myocardial infarction, bleeding, and the need for new-onset dialysis.

RESULTS

One-year survival was similar (HR [95% CI] for TAVI 1.271 [0.795, 2.031], p = 0.316), with no divergence in Kaplan-Meier curves. In spite of post-procedural short-term survival being numerically higher for TAVI patients and 1-year survival being numerically higher for SAVR patients, such differences did not reach statistical significance (96.4% vs. 94.2%, p = 0.199, and 86.2% vs. 81.2%, p = 0.316, respectively). In weighted analyses, pacemaker implantation, vascular complications, and were significantly more common with TAVI; whereas myocardial infarction, bleeding requiring transfusion, and longer ICU-stay and overall hospitalization were higher with SAVR. Temporary dialysis was more common with SAVR (p < 0.0001); however, a probable need for chronic dialysis was rare and similar in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Both TAVI and SAVR led to comparable and excellent results in patients with moderate-to-severe CKD in an intermediate-risk population of patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis for whom both therapies could possibly be considered.

Effect of TAVR Approach and Other Baseline Factors on the Incidence of Acute Kidney Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a well-known complication following a transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and is associated with higher morbidity and mortality.

Objective

We aim to compare the risk of developing AKI after transfemoral (TF), transapical (TA), and transaortic (TAo) approaches following TAVR.

Methods

We searched Medline and EMBASE databases from January 2009 to January 2021. We included studies that evaluated the risk of AKI based on different TAVR approaches. After extracting each study's data, we calculated the risk ratio and 95% confidence intervals using RevMan software 5.4. Publication bias was assessed by the forest plot.

Results

Thirty-six (36) studies, consisting of 70,406 patients undergoing TAVR were included. Thirty-five studies compared TF to TA, and only seven investigations compared TF to TAo. AKI was documented in 4,857 out of 50,395 (9.6%) patients that underwent TF TAVR compared to 3,155 out of 19,721 (16%) patients who underwent TA-TAVR, with a risk ratio of 0.49 (95% CI, 0.36–0.66; p < 0.00001). Likewise, 273 patients developed AKI out of the 1,840 patients (14.8%) that underwent TF-TAVR in contrast to 67 patients out of the 421 patients (15.9%) that underwent TAo-TAVR, with a risk ratio of 0.51 (95% CI, 0.27–0.98; p = 0.04). There was no significant risk when we compared TA to TAo approaches, with a risk ratio of 0.89 (95% CI, 0.29–2.75; p = 0.84).

Conclusion

The risk of post-TAVR AKI is significantly lower in patients who underwent TF-TAVR than those who underwent TA-TAVR or TAo-TAVR.

5-Year Outcomes Comparing Surgical Versus Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to compare 5-year cardiovascular, renal, and bioprosthetic valve durability outcomes in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR).

BACKGROUND

Patients with severe AS and CKD undergoing TAVR or SAVR are a challenging, understudied clinical subset.

METHODS

Intermediate-risk patients with moderate to severe CKD (estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min/m²) from the PARTNER (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valve) 2A trial (patients randomly assigned to SAPIEN XT TAVR or SAVR) and SAPIEN 3 Intermediate Risk Registry were pooled. The composite primary outcome of death, stroke, rehospitalization, and new hemodialysis was evaluated using Cox regression analysis. Patients with and without perioperative acute kidney injury (AKI) were followed through 5 years. A core laboratory-adjudicated analysis of structural valve deterioration and bioprosthetic valve failure was also performed.

RESULTS

The study population included 1,045 TAVR patients (512 SAPIEN XT, 533 SAPIEN 3) and 479 SAVR patients. At 5 years, SAVR was better than SAPIEN XT TAVR (52.8% vs 68.0%; P = 0.04) but similar to SAPIEN 3 TAVR (52.8% vs 58.7%; P = 0.89). Perioperative AKI was more common after SAVR than TAVR (26.3% vs 10.3%; P < 0.001) and was independently associated with long-term outcomes. Compared with SAVR, bioprosthetic valve failure and stage 2 or 3 structural valve deterioration were significantly greater for SAPIEN XT TAVR (P < 0.05) but not for SAPIEN 3 TAVR.

CONCLUSIONS

In intermediate-risk patients with AS and CKD, SAPIEN 3 TAVR and SAVR were associated with a similar risk for the primary endpoint at 5 years. AKI was more common after SAVR than TAVR, and SAPIEN 3 valve durability was comparable with that of surgical bioprostheses.

Evaluation and Management of Aortic Stenosis in Chronic Kidney Disease: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

Aortic stenosis with concomitant chronic kidney disease (CKD) represents a clinical challenge. Aortic stenosis is more prevalent and progresses more rapidly and unpredictably in CKD, and the presence of CKD is associated with worse short-term and long-term outcomes after aortic valve replacement. Because patients with advanced CKD and end-stage kidney disease have been excluded from randomized trials, clinicians need to make complex management decisions in this population that are based on retrospective and observational evidence. This statement summarizes the epidemiological and pathophysiological characteristics of aortic stenosis in the context of CKD, evaluates the nuances and prognostic information provided by noninvasive cardiovascular imaging with echocardiography and advanced imaging techniques, and outlines the special risks in this population. Furthermore, this statement provides a critical review of the existing literature pertaining to clinical outcomes of surgical versus transcatheter aortic valve replacement in this high-risk population to help guide clinical decision making in the choice of aortic valve replacement and specific prosthesis. Finally, this statement provides an approach to the perioperative management of these patients, with special attention to a multidisciplinary heart-kidney collaborative team-based approach.