A Machine Learning Model for the Accurate Prediction of 1-Year Survival in TAVI Patients: A Retrospective Observational Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

predicting the 1-year survival of patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is indispensable for managing safe early discharge strategies and resource optimization.

METHODS

Routinely acquired data (134 variables) were used from 629 patients, who underwent transfemoral TAVI from 2012 up to 2018. Support vector machines, neuronal networks, random forests, nearest neighbour and Bayes models were used with new, previously unseen patients to predict 1-year mortality in TAVI patients. A genetic variable selection algorithm identified a set of predictor variables with high predictive power.

RESULTS

Univariate analyses revealed 19 variables (clinical, laboratory, echocardiographic, computed tomographic and ECG) that significantly influence 1-year survival. Before applying the reject option, the model performances in terms of negative predictive value (NPV) and positive predictive value (PPV) were similar between all models. After applying the reject option, the random forest model identified a subcohort showing a negative predictive value of 96% (positive predictive value = 92%, accuracy = 96%).

CONCLUSIONS

Our model can predict the 1-year survival with very high negative and sufficiently high positive predictive value, with very high accuracy. The "reject option" allows a high performance and harmonic integration of machine learning in the clinical decision process.

Is the outcome of elective vs non-elective patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation different? Results of a single-centre, observational assessment of outcomes at a large university clinic

BACKGROUND

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) can either be conducted as an elective (scheduled in advance) or a non-elective procedure performed during an unplanned hospital admission. The objective of this study was to compare the outcomes of elective and non-elective TAVI patients.

METHODS

This single-centre study included 512 patients undergoing transfemoral TAVI between October 2018 and December 2020; 378 (73.8%) were admitted for elective TAVI, 134 (26.2%) underwent a non-elective procedure. Our TAVI programme entails an optimized fast-track concept aimed at minimizing the total length of stay to ≤ 5 days for elective patients which in the German healthcare system is currently defined as the minimal time period to safely perform TAVI. Clinical characteristics and survival rates at 30 days and 1 year were analysed.

RESULTS

Patients who underwent non-elective TAVI had a significantly higher comorbidity burden. Median duration from admission to discharge was 6 days (elective group 6 days versus non-elective group 15 days; p < 0.001), including a median postprocedural stay of 5 days (elective 4 days versus non-elective 7 days; p < 0.001). All-cause mortality at 30 days was 1.1% for the elective group and 3.7% for non-elective patients (p = 0.030). At 1 year, all-cause mortality among elective TAVI patients was disproportionately lower than in non-elective patients (5.0% versus 18.7%, p < 0.001). In the elective group, 54.5% of patients could not be discharged early due to comorbidities or procedural complications. Factors associated with a failure of achieving a total length of stay of ≤ 5 days comprised frailty syndrome, renal impairment as well as new permanent pacemaker implantation, new bundle branch block or atrial fibrillation, life-threatening bleeding, and the use of self-expanding valves. After multivariate adjustment, new permanent pacemaker implantation (odds ratio 6.44; 95% CI 2.59-16.00), life-threatening bleeding (odds ratio 4.19; 95% confidence interval 1.82-9.66) and frailty syndrome (odds ratio 5.15; 95% confidence interval 2.40-11.09; all p < 0.001, respectively) were confirmed as significant factors.

CONCLUSIONS

While non-elective patients had acceptable periprocedural outcomes, mortality rates at 1 year were significantly higher compared to elective patients. Approximately only half of elective patients could be discharged early. Improvements in periprocedural care, follow-up strategies and optimized treatment of both elective and non-elective TAVI patients are needed.

New Practices in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: How I Do It in 2023

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) went through a huge evolution in the last decades. Previously performed under general anesthesia, with transoperative transesophageal echocardiography guidance and using cutdown femoral artery access, the procedure has now evolved into a minimalist approach, with local anesthesia, conscious sedation, and the avoidance of invasive lines becoming the new standards. Here, we discuss the minimalist TAVI approach and how we incorporate it into our current clinical practice.

The safety of early discharge following transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement under general anesthesia

Background

There is growing evidence of the safety of same-day discharge for low-risk conscious sedated TAVR patients. However, the evidence supporting the safety of early discharge following GA-TAVR with routine transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) is limited.

Aims

To assess the safety of early discharge following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) using General Anesthesia (GA-TAVR) and identify predictors for patient selection.

Materials and methods

We used data from 2,447 TEE-guided GA-TAVR patients performed at Cedars-Sinai between 2016 and 2021. Patients were categorized into three groups based on the discharge time from admission: 24 h, 24–48 h, and >48 h. Predictors for 30-day outcomes (cumulative adverse events and death) were validated on a matched cohort of 24 h vs. >24 h using the bootstrap model.

Results

The >48 h group had significantly worse baseline cardiovascular profile, higher surgical risk, low functional status, and higher procedural complications than the 24 h and the 24–48 h groups. The rate of 30-day outcomes was significantly lower in the 24 h than the >48 h but did not differ from the 24–48 h (11.3 vs. 15.5 vs. 11.7%, p = 0.003 and p = 0.71, respectively). Independent poor prognostic factors of 30-day outcomes had a high STS risk of ≥8 (OR 1.90, 95% CI 1.30–2.77, E-value = 3.2, P < 0.001), low left ventricle ejection fraction of <30% (OR 6.0, 95% CI 3.96–9.10, E-value = 11.5, P < 0.001), and life-threatening procedural complications (OR 2.65, 95% CI 1.20–5.89, E-value = 4.7, P = 0.04). Our formulated predictors showed a good discrimination ability for patient selection (AUC: 0.78, 95% CI 0.75–0.81).

Conclusion

Discharge within 24 h following GA-TAVR using TEE is safe for selected patients using our proposed validated predictors.

Cardiovascular disease and COVID-19, a deadly combination: A review about direct and indirect impact of a pandemic

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is known to present with respiratory symptoms, which can lead to severe pneumonia and respiratory failure. However, it can have multisystem complications such as cardiovascular manifestations. The cardiovascular manifestations reported comprise myocarditis, cardiogenic shock, arrhythmias, pulmonary embolism, deep vein embolism, acute heart failure, and myocardial infarction. There is also an indirect impact of the pandemic on the management of cardiovascular care that has been shown clearly in multiple publications. In this review, we summarize the deadly relation of COVID-19 with cardiovascular events and the wider impact on several cardiovascular care areas by the pandemic situation

The 30-Day Readmission Rate of Same-Day Discharge Following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (from National Readmission Database 2015 to 2019)

The length of hospital stay after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has decreased over the years, and next-day discharge is being increasingly adopted in clinical practice. Whether further expediting discharge after TAVI by allowing same-day discharge (SDD) in selected patients is safe or derives additional benefits remains unanswered. Using the United States Nationwide Readmission Database 2015 to 2019, we identified 196,618 patients who received TAVI (mean age 79.5 8.4 years, 45.0% female). Of these, 245 patients (0.12%) were discharged on the same day they received TAVI (SDD group), and the remaining 196,373 were discharged on a different day (different-day discharge [DDD] group). A propensity score-matched analysis was done. The rate of unplanned readmission within 30 days of discharge was not significantly different between the SDD and DDD groups (11.0% vs 10.6%, hazard ratio 1.03, 95% confidence interval 0.56 to 1.90, p = 0.921). Hospitalization costs were significantly lower in the SDD group than the DDD group ($37,811 ± 18,029 vs $49,130 ± 27,007, p <0.001). In conclusion, the 30-day readmission rate was similar for patients discharged on the same day after TAVI and for patients discharged at a later time point.

Predictors of early discharge after transcatheter aortic valve implantation: insight from the CoreValve ClinicalService

AIMS

The aim of this study was to minimize the procedure, and reduce the length of hospital stay (LoS) is the future objective for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVI).Aims of the study are to identify procedural and electrocardiographical predictors of fast-track discharge in patients who underwent TAVI.

METHODS

Patients treated with TAVI included in the One Hospital ClinicalService project were categorized according to the LoS. 'Fast-Track' population, with a postprocedural LoS less than or equal to 3 days, was compared with the 'Slow-Track' population with a postprocedural LoS greater than 3 days.

RESULTS

One thousand five hundred and one patients were collected. Despite single baseline characteristics being almost similar between the two groups, Slow-Track group showed a higher surgical risk (P < 0.001). Patients in the Slow-Track group were more frequently treated with general anaesthesia (P = 0.002) and less frequently predilated (P < 0.001) and received a lower amount of contrast media. No difference between Slow-Track and Fast-Track patients was observed at 30 days in death and in cardiovascular rehospitalization.In the multivariable analysis, STS score of at least 4% [odds ratio (OR): 1.64; P = 0.01], general anaesthesia (OR: 2.80; P = 0.03), predilation (OR: 0.45; P < 001), NYHA 3-4 at baseline (OR: 1.65; P = 0.01), AVB I/LBBB/RBBB onset (OR: 2.41; P < 0.001) and in-hospital new PM (OR: 2.63; P < 0.001) were independently associated with a higher probability of Slow-Track.

CONCLUSION

Fast-Track patients were safely discharged home showing no difference in clinical outcomes after discharge up to 30 days compared with the Slow-Track group. The STS score, general anaesthesia, NYHA 3--4 at baseline, in-hospital onset of conduction disturbances and new PM implantation after TAVI turned out to be predictors of Slow-Track.

Feasibility and Safety of Same-Day Discharge Following Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

OBJECTIVES

This study evaluated the feasibility and safety of same-day discharge (SDD) following transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TF-TAVR) compared with next-day discharge (NDD).

BACKGROUND

Reducing hospital length of stay is an important goal for patients and hospitals. Cleveland Clinic implemented a post-TAVR SDD pathway beginning in March 2020.

METHODS

The study retrospectively analyzed patients who underwent "minimalist" outpatient TF-TAVR in 2019 to 2020. SDD was applied to patients who met the predefined criteria. Outcomes included in-hospital and 30-day events and were compared between SDD and NDD (during and prior to availability of the SDD pathway).

RESULTS

In 2020, SDD and NDD accounted for 22.1% (n = 114 of 516) and 63.8% (n = 329 of 516) of outpatient TF-TAVR, respectively. SDD patients in 2020, compared with NDD patients in 2019 (n = 481), were younger, were more often male, and had a lower surgical risk. There were no significant differences in in-hospital events and 30-day readmissions (cardiovascular readmission: 3.5% vs 6.2%; P = 0.37; noncardiovascular readmission: 2.6% vs 4.0%; P = 0.78), and there were no deaths after SDD. These outcomes remained consistent after propensity score matching. Only 1 (0.9%) patient required pacemaker implantation after SDD (post-TAVR day 25). As expected based on SDD criteria, multivariable logistic regression analysis identified procedure end-time as the strongest predictor of SDD (adjusted OR: 7.74; 95% CI: 4.39-13.63), while male sex and baseline hemoglobin level were also associated with SDD.

CONCLUSIONS

SDD after TF-TAVR was feasible in this early experience without impairing post-discharge safety. Our SDD pathway may serve as a useful strategy to improve bed utilization and reduce hospital stay for TAVR recipients.

One-Year Outcomes and Trends over Two Eras of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Real-World Practice

Background: Data reflecting the benefit of procedural improvements in real-world transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) practice are sparse. Aims: To compare outcomes and trends of two TAVI eras from real Italian practice. Methods: A total of 1811 and 2939 TAVI patients enrolled in the national, prospective OBSERVANT and OBSERVANT II studies in 2010–2012 and 2016–2018, respectively, were compared in a cohort study. Outcomes were adjusted using inverse propensity of treatment weighting and propensity score matching. Results: The median age (83.0 (79.0–86.0) vs. 83.0 (79.0–86.0)) and EuroSCORE II (5.2 (3.2–7.7) vs. 5.1 (3.1–8.1)) of OBSERVANT and OBSERVANT II patients were similar. At 1 year, patients of the OBSERVANT II study had a significantly lower risk of all-cause death (10.6% vs. 16.3%, Hazard Ratio (HR) 0.63 (95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.52–0.76)) and rehospitalization for heart failure (HF) (14.3% vs. 19.5%, Sub-distribution HR 0.71 (95%CI 0.60–0.84)), whereas rates of stroke (3.1% vs. 3.6%) and permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) (16.6% vs. 18.0%) were comparable between study groups. Conclusions: Age and risk profile among patients undergoing TAVI in Italy remained substantially unchanged between the 2010–2012 and 2016–2018 time periods. After adjustment, patients undergoing TAVI in the most recent era had lower risk of all-cause death and rehospitalization for HF at 1 year, whereas rates of stroke and PPI did not differ significantly.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation during COVID-19 pandemic: An optimized model to relieve healthcare system overload

Background

The coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic upset healthcare systems and their logistics worldwide. We sought to assess safety and effectiveness of an optimized logistics for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) pathway developed during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

This is a retrospective analysis. An optimized TAVI logistics based on performing TAVI work-up and procedure during the same hospitalization was used during the COVID-19 pandemic. In-hospital and 30-day outcomes of patients treated during the pandemic were compared with an historical cohort of patients undergoing TAVI with staged work-up before the pandemic within an homogeneous timeframe.

Results

Of 536 patients, 227 (42.4%) underwent TAVI during the COVID-19 pandemic with a reduction of 26.5% compared to the pre-pandemic period (n = 309). The median age was 81 (77–85) years and STS score was 3.4 (2.2–5.6)%. Lower rates of in-hospital major vascular complications (2.2% vs. 8.7%; p < 0.01) and life-threatening bleeding (0.4% vs. 4.2%; p = 0.01) were reported in the COVID-19 period, whereas no difference in acute kidney injury (7.0% vs. 7.4%, p = 0.85) rate was reported between COVID-19 and pre-COVID-19 periods. No difference in 30-day rates of all-cause death (4.0 vs. 4.5, p = 0.75) and of major adverse cardiovascular events (4.0 vs. 6.1, p = 0.26) were reported between COVID-19 and pre-COVID-19 periods.

Conclusions

The use of optimized single-hospitalization logistics for TAVI workup and procedure developed during the COVID-19 pandemic, showed to be as safe and effective as the two-stage TAVI pathway previously adopted, allowing the minimization of potential exposure to COVID-19 infection and shortening times to treatment for severely symptomatic patients.

An upfront combined strategy for endovascular haemostasis in transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation

BACKGROUND

Vascular complications still represent an important issue after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI).

AIMS

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of upfront use of an adjunctive Angio-Seal (AS) plug-based system on top of suture-based devices (SBDs) for endovascular haemostasis after transfemoral (TF) TAVI.

METHODS

From January 2019 to April 2020, 332 consecutive patients with preprocedural computed tomography angiography (CTA) assessment underwent fully percutaneous TF-TAVI. The primary outcomes were 30-day major vascular complications and major or life-threatening (LT) bleeding due to endovascular closure system failure. A total of 246 TF-TAVI patients (123 pairs), undergoing either isolated SBD or SBD+AS, were matched using the propensity-score method.

RESULTS

At 30 days, patients receiving SBD+AS had lower rates of major/LT bleeding (1.6% vs 8.9%, odds ratio [OR] 0.17, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.04-0.78; p<0.01) and major vascular complications (1.6% vs 8.9%, OR 0.17, 95% CI: 0.04-0.78; p<0.01). In addition, the use of SBD+AS was associated with a significant cost saving related to the vascular event (mean difference -315.3 € per patient, 95% CI: -566.4 € to -64.1 €; p=0.01), and a higher probability of next-day discharge (NDD) after TAVI (30.9% vs 16.3%, OR 2.30, 95% CI: 1.25-4.25; p<0.01). No difference in all-cause 30-day mortality was observed (3.3% vs 1.6% for SBD and SBD+AS groups, respectively, OR 0.49, 95% CI: 0.09-2.74; p=0.41).

CONCLUSIONS

An upfront combined strategy with an additional AS plug-based device on top of SBDs was shown to reduce major vascular complications and major/LT bleeding due to closure system failure after TF-TAVI. This approach was associated with a cost saving and with a higher probability of NDD compared to the use of isolated SBD. Visual summary. Effectiveness of the upfront combined strategy for endovascular haemostasis in transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation using Angio-Seal on top of a suture-based device (SBD) versus the isolated use of SBD. LT: life-threatening; TF-TAVI: transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

Next-Day Discharge vs Early Discharge After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

With the growing utilization of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) as an alternative option to surgical valve replacement (SAVR) in patients considered to be suboptimal for surgery, there is a need to explore the possibility of next day discharge (NDD) and its potential outcomes. The aim of our study is to compare outcomes and complications following NDD vs the standard early discharge (ED) (less than 3 days). A comprehensive literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane to identify relevant trials. Summary effects were calculated using a DerSimonian and Laird random effects model as odds ratio with 95% confidence intervals for all the clinical endpoints. Studies comparing same-day or next-day discharge vs discharge within the next three days were included in our analysis. 6 studies with 2,672 patients were identified. The risk of bleeding and vascular complications was significantly lower in patients with NDD compared to ED (OR 0.10, P < 0.00001 and OR 0.22, P = 0.002 respectively). The incidence of permanent pacemaker (PPM) implants was significantly lower in patients who had NDD compared to ED (OR 0.21, P = 0.0005). The incidence of 30 day mortality, stroke, AKI and readmission rates was not different between the two groups. NDD after TAVR allows for reduction in hospital stay and can mitigate hospital costs without an increased risk of complications. Our analysis shows that complication rate is comparable to ED, NDD is a reasonable option for certain patients with severe aortic stenosis who undergo TAVR. Further studies are needed to elucidate whether higher risk patients who would benefit from an extended inpatient monitoring post TAVR.

Carotid versus femoral access for transcatheter aortic valve replacement: comparable results in the current era

OBJECTIVES

The carotid approach for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has been shown to be feasible and safe. The goal of this study was to compare the 30-day outcomes of trans-carotid (TC) and transfemoral (TF) TAVR.

METHODS

This retrospective study enrolled 500 consecutive patients treated by TC-TAVR (n = 100) or TF-TAVR (n = 400) with percutaneous closure between January 2018 and January 2020 at the Nantes University Hospital. The primary end-point was the occurrence of cardiovascular death and cerebrovascular events at 30 days.

RESULTS

The mean age was 79.9 ± 8.1 in the TC group and 81.3 ± 6.9 (P = 0.069) in the TF group. The TC group had more men (69% vs 50.5%; P = 0.001) and more patients with peripheral vascular disease (86% vs 14.8%; P < 0.0001). Cardiac characteristics were similar between the groups, and the EuroSCORE II was 3.8 ± 2.6% vs 4.6 ± 6.0%, respectively (P = 0.443). The 30-day mortality was 2% in the TC group versus 1% in the TF group (P = 0.345). TC-TAVR was not associated with an increased risk of stroke (2% vs 2.5%; P = 0.999) or major vascular complications (2% vs 4%; P = 0.548). More permanent pacemakers were implanted in the TF group (14.9% vs 5.6%; P = 0.015), and no moderate or severe aortic regurgitation was observed in the TC group (0 vs 3.3%; P = 0.08). TC-TAVR was not associated with an increased risk of mortality or stroke at 30 days (odds ratio 1.32; 95% confidence interval 0.42-4.21; P = 0.63) in the multivariable analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

No statistically significant differences between TC-TAVR and TF-TAVR were observed; therefore, TC-TAVR should be the first alternative in patients with anatomical contraindications to the femoral route.

National trends and 30-day readmission rates for next-day-discharge transcatheter aortic valve replacement: An analysis from the Nationwide Readmissions Database, 2012-2016

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has evolved toward a minimalist approach, resulting in shorter hospital stays. Real-world trends of next-day discharge (NDD) TAVR are unknown. This study aimed to evaluate underlying trends and readmissions of NDD TAVR.

METHODS

This study was derived from the Nationwide Readmissions Database from 2012 to 2016. International Classification of Diseases, Ninth and Tenth Revisions, codes were used to identify patients. Any discharge within 1 day of admission was identified as NDD. NDD TAVR trends over the years were analyzed, and any admissions within 30 days were considered readmissions. A hierarchical logistic regression model was used to identify predictors of readmission.

RESULTS

Of 49,742 TAVR procedures, 3,104 were NDD. The percentage of NDD TAVR increased from 1.5% (46/3,051) in 2012 to 12.2% (2,393/19,613) in 2016. However, the 30-day readmission rate remained the same over the years (8.6%). The patients' mean age was 80.3 ± 8.4 years. Major readmission causes were heart-failure exacerbation (16%), infections (9%), and procedural complications (8%). In 2016, there were significantly higher late conduction disorder and gastrointestinal bleeding readmission rates than in 2012-2015. Significant predictors of readmission were anemia, baseline conduction disease, cardiac arrhythmias, heart failure, chronic kidney disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, neoplastic disorders, and discharge to facility.

CONCLUSIONS

The percentage of NDD TAVR increased over the years; however, readmission rates remained the same, with a higher rate of conduction abnormality-related hospitalizations in 2016. Careful discharge planning that includes identification of baseline factors that predict readmission and knowledge of etiologies may further prevent 30-day readmissions.