Comparison of two valve systems for transapical aortic valve implantation: a propensity score-matched analysis.

OBJECTIVES Several alternative transapical (TA) aortic prostheses for aortic valve implantation (AVI) have recently become available. Data directly comparing the performance of these different TA-AVI valves, however, are sparse. Therefore, we sought to analyse the performance of the better-established balloon-expandable SAPIEN XT™ valve system, and compare it with the recently approved self-expandable ACURATE TA™ system by means of propensity score (PS) analysis. METHODS Samples from a total of 310 consecutive patients treated with transapical transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) were included (2010-2014). The ACURATE valve was implanted in 40% (n = 131), SAPIEN in 60% (n = 179). To adjust for baseline differences, 1:1 PS matching was used, and resulted in 103 matched pairs. In addition to demographical and clinical variables, potential anatomical confounders (calcification grade: computed tomography (CT) Agatston score; annulus diameter: CT-effective diameter) were included within the PS estimation. RESULTS For ACURATE- versus SAPIEN-treated patients, the mean age was 83.1 ± 5.4 vs 79.8 ± 9.5 (P < 0.001). Mean Society of Thoracic Surgeon scores were 7.7 ± 4.6 vs 8.1 ± 6.0 (P = 0.56). PS matching resulted in bias reduction <0.2, indicating excellent balance and allowing for valid outcome comparison. Device success, 30-day mortality rate and 1-year survival were comparable. Pacemaker and 30-day neurological event rates were not significantly different. The need for post-ballooning was significantly higher in the self-expandable group (40% vs 9%; P < 0.001). Echocardiography upon discharge demonstrated excellent functional outcomes regarding residual paravalvular leaks (ACURATE: 3% vs SAPIEN: 4%, P = 1.0) with slightly higher mean gradients in the ACURATE group (12 ± 5 mmHg vs 10 ± 5 mmHg, P = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS The two transapical TAVI devices demonstrated comparable haemodynamic performance and clinical outcome. The self-expandable valve required more frequent post-ballooning without affecting the safety profile.

[1]  T. Walther,et al.  Recent Advances in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: Novel Devices and Potential Shortcomings , 2013, Current cardiology reviews.

[2]  T. Walther,et al.  Manual versus automatic detection of aortic annulus plane in a computed tomography scan for transcatheter aortic valve implantation screening. , 2013, European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery.

[3]  Susheel Kodali,et al.  Two-Year Outcomes After Transcatheter or Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement , 2013 .

[4]  Antonio Colombo,et al.  Clinical ResearchInterventional CardiologyIncidence, Predictors, and Outcomes of Aortic Regurgitation After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review of Literature , 2013 .

[5]  T. Walther,et al.  PREVAIL TRANSAPICAL: multicentre trial of transcatheter aortic valve implantation using the newly designed bioprosthesis (SAPIEN-XT) and delivery system (ASCENDRA-II). , 2012, European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery.

[6]  F. Mohr,et al.  Automatically segmented DynaCT: enhanced imaging during transcatheter aortic valve implantation. , 2011, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[7]  Stef van Buuren,et al.  MICE: Multivariate Imputation by Chained Equations in R , 2011 .

[8]  G. Schuler,et al.  A second prosthesis as a procedural rescue option in trans-apical aortic valve implantation. , 2011, European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery.

[9]  G. Schuler,et al.  Transapical Aortic Valve Implantation: Analysis of Risk Factors and Learning Experience in 299 Patients , 2010, Circulation.

[10]  Jasjeet S. Sekhon,et al.  Multivariate and Propensity Score Matching Software with Automated Balance Optimization: The Matching Package for R , 2008 .

[11]  D. Rubin The design versus the analysis of observational studies for causal effects: parallels with the design of randomized trials , 2007, Statistics in medicine.

[12]  R. Sugden Multiple Imputation for Nonresponse in Surveys , 1988 .

[13]  G. Kakos,et al.  Counterpulsation catheter fracture: an unexpected hazard. , 1977, The Annals of thoracic surgery.

[14]  T. Walther,et al.  First experience without pre-ballooning in transapical aortic valve implantation: a propensity score-matched analysis. , 2015, European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery.

[15]  Thomas Walther,et al.  Transapical aortic valve implantation using a new self-expandable bioprosthesis (ACURATE TA™): 6-month outcomes. , 2013, European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery.

[16]  Cedric E. Ginestet ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis , 2011 .

[17]  Michael P. Fay,et al.  Two-sided Exact Tests and Matching Confidence Intervals for Discrete Data , 2010, R J..

[18]  Volkmar Falk,et al.  Transapical aortic valve implantation: step by step. , 2009, The Annals of thoracic surgery.

[19]  D. Rubin,et al.  Matched Sampling for Causal Effects: The Central Role of the Propensity Score in Observational Studies for Causal Effects , 2006 .

[20]  Masuhiro Kogoma 総論;総論;Introduction , 2006 .

[21]  E. Blackstone Comparing apples and oranges. , 2002, The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery.

[22]  M. Mack,et al.  ransapical Aortic Valve Implantation : tep by Step , 2022 .