Søndergaard L, Steinbrüchel DA, Ihlemann N, Nissen H, Kjeldsen BJ, Petursson P, Ngo AT, Olsen NT, Chang Y, Franzen OW, Engstrøm T, Clemmensen P, Olsen PS, Thyregod HGH. Two-Year Outcomes in Patients With Severe Aortic Valve Stenosis Randomized to Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement: The All-Comers Nordic Aortic Valve Intervention Randomized Clinical Trial.
Circ Cardiovasc Interv 2017;
9:CIRCINTERVENTIONS.115.003665. [PMID:
27296202 DOI:
10.1161/circinterventions.115.003665]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 136] [Impact Index Per Article: 17.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/14/2015] [Accepted: 04/27/2016] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND
The Nordic Aortic Valve Intervention (NOTION) trial was the first to randomize all-comers with severe native aortic valve stenosis to either transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with the CoreValve self-expanding bioprosthesis or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR), including a lower-risk patient population than previous trials. This article reports 2-year clinical and echocardiographic outcomes from the NOTION trial.
METHODS AND RESULTS
Two-hundred eighty patients from 3 centers in Denmark and Sweden were randomized to either TAVR (n=145) or SAVR (n=135) with follow-up planned for 5 years. There was no difference in all-cause mortality at 2 years between TAVR and SAVR (8.0% versus 9.8%, respectively; P=0.54) or cardiovascular mortality (6.5% versus 9.1%; P=0.40). The composite outcome of all-cause mortality, stroke, or myocardial infarction was also similar (15.8% versus 18.8%, P=0.43). Forward-flow hemodynamics were improved following both procedures, with effective orifice area significantly more improved after TAVR than SAVR (effective orifice area, 1.7 versus 1.4 cm(2) at 3 months). Mean valve gradients were similar after TAVR and SAVR. When patients were categorized according to Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality (STS-PROM) (<4% versus ≥4%), there was no statistically significant difference for TAVR and SAVR groups in the composite outcome for low-risk (14.7%, 95% confidence interval, 8.3-21.2 versus 16.8%; 95% confidence interval, 9.7-23.8; P=0.58) or intermediate-risk patients (21.1% versus 27.1%; P=0.59).
CONCLUSIONS
Two-year results from the NOTION trial demonstrate the continuing safety and effectiveness of TAVR in lower-risk patients. Longer-term data are needed to verify the durability of this procedure in this patient population.
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION
URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01057173.
Collapse