Evaluación de los resultados en salud del implante valvular aórtico transcatéter en una cohorte de pacientes según su perfil de riesgo

  1. Eduardo Pinar Bermúdez 1
  2. Juan Garcia De Lara 1
  3. José A. Hurtado Martínez 1
  4. Miguel Robles 2
  5. Gunnar Leithold 1
  6. Belén Martí Sánchez 3
  7. Paloma González 3
  8. Kim Rand 4
  9. Jesús Cuervo 5
  1. 1 Departamento de Cardiología, Hospital Universitario Virgen de la Arrixaca, Murcia, España
  2. 2 Accounting Department, Servicio Regional de Salud, Murcia, España
  3. 3 Edwards Lifesciences, Valencia, España
  4. 4 Health Services Research Centre, Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog, Noruega
  5. 5 Axentiva Solutions, Oviedo, España
Erakutsi afiliazioak +
Aldizkaria:
REC: Interventional Cardiology

ISSN: 2604-7276,  2604-7306

Argitalpen urtea: 2023

Alea: 5

Zenbakia: 2

Orrialdeak: 102-109

Mota: Artikulua

DOI: 10.24875/RECIC.M23000363 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

Beste argitalpen batzuk: REC: Interventional Cardiology

Garapen Iraunkorreko Helburuak

Laburpena

Introduction and objectives: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is an increasingly used procedure to treat severe aortic stenosis (AS) that should be monitored in the real-world routine clinical practice. We assessed TAVI outcomes (SAPIEN 3) in terms of the patient’s health-related quality of life (HRQoL), clinical endpoints, and resource utilization considering a valid risk score. Methods: This was an observational prospective study including all consecutive patients with severe AS treated with TAVI (Edwards SAPIEN 3, transfemoral access) conducted during the calendar year of 2018. A systematic assessment of the patients’ HRQoL (EQ-5D-5L, the 36-item Short Form Health Survey, and the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire), clinical endpoints, and resource utilization (length of stay at the hospital/intensive care unit setting) was implemented. Assessment was scheduled before the procedure (baseline), at discharge, and 1, 6, and 12 months after implantation. Multivariate regression models were applied to test outcomes while controlling the patients’ risk (eg, Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk score). Results: A total of 76 patients (50% female) with a mean age of 82.05 ± 4.76 years, and 55% with intermediate-high risk were included. The rates of successful impantation and cardiac death were 97.37% and 2.63%, respectively, at 1 year. Significant reductions in mean and maximum gradients were achieved and maintained at follow-up. The mean length of stay at the hospital (5.2 6 ± 4.05) and intensive care unit setting (0.22 ± 0.64) was short. Significant improvements (all adjusted P < .05) were detected in the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire overall summary scores, EQ-5D-5L, and the 36-item Short Form (physical component summary). Conclusions: This research highlights how positive clinical outcomes translated into significant improvements in relation to the patients’ HRQoL. Use of resources —generally low— was based on the Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk score. (SARU Study; code: 2017-01, Murcia, Spain).

Erreferentzia bibliografikoak

  • 1. Iung B, Delgado V, Rosenhek R, et al. Contemporary Presentation and Management of Valvular Heart Disease: The EURObservational Research Programme Valvular Heart Disease II Survey. Circulation. 2019;140:1156-1169.
  • 2. Ferreira-González I, Pinar-Sopena J, Ribera A, et al. Prevalence of calcific aortic valve disease in the elderly and associated risk factors: A population-based study in a Mediterranean area. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2013;20:1022-1030.
  • 3. Durko AP, Osnabrugge RL, Van Mieghem NM, et al. Annual number of candidates for transcatheter aortic valve implantation per country: current estimates and future projections. Eur Heart J. 2018;39:2635-2642.
  • 4. Otto CM, Lind BK, Kitzman DW, Gersh BJ, Siscovick DS. Association of Aortic-Valve Sclerosis with Cardiovascular Mortality and Morbidity in the Elderly. N Engl J Med. 1999;341:142-147.
  • 5. Otto CM, Burwash IG, Legget ME, et al. Prospective study of asymptomatic valvular aortic stenosis: Clinical, echocardiographic, and exercise predictors of outcome. Circulation. 1997;95:2262-2270.
  • 6. Baumgartner H, Falk V, Bax JJ, et al. 2017 ESC/EACTS Guidelines for the management of valvular heart disease. Eur Hear J. 2017;38:2739-2791.
  • 7. Thourani VH, Kodali S, Makkar RR, et al. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement versus surgical valve replacement in intermediate-risk patients: a propensity score analysis. Lancet. 2016;387:2218-2225.
  • 8. Herrmann HC, Thourani VH, Kodali SK, et al. One-Year Clinical Outcomes With SAPIEN 3 Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in High-Risk and Inoperable Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis. Circulation. 2016;134: 130-140.
  • 9. Mack MJ, Leon MB, Thourani VH, et al. Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Replacement with a Balloon-Expandable Valve in Low-Risk Patients. N Engl J Med. 2019;380:1695-1705.
  • 10. Popma JJ, Deeb GM, Yakubov SJ, et al. Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Replacement with a Self-Expanding Valve in Low-Risk Patients. N Engl J Med. 2019;380:1706-1715.
  • 11. Otto CM, Nishimura RA, Bonow RO, et al. 2020 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice. Circulation. 2021;143:e35-e71.
  • 12. Kuck K-H, Bleiziffer S, Eggebrecht H, et al. Konsensuspapier der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Kardiologie (DGK) und der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Thorax-, Herz- und Gefäßchirurgie (DGTHG) zur kathetergestützten Aortenklappenimplantation (TAVI) 2020. Der Kardiol. 2020;14:182-204.
  • 13. Kumar A, Sato K, Narayanswami J, et al. Current Society of Thoracic Surgeons Model Reclassifies Mortality Risk in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2018;11:e006664.
  • 14. Kappetein AP, Head SJ, Généreux P, et al. Updated standardized endpoint definitions for transcatheter aortic valve implantation: The valve academic research consortium-2 consensus document. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;60:1438-1454.
  • 15. Green CP, Porter CB, Bresnahan DR, Spertus JA. Development and evaluation of the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire: a new health status measure for heart failure. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2000;35:1245-1255.
  • 16. US Food and Drug Administration -Center for Devices and Radiological Health. Medical Device Development Tool (MDDT) Qualification Decision Summary For Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ). 2021. Disponible en https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/science-and-research-medical-devices/medical-device-development-tools-mddt. Consultado 20 Nov 2022.
  • 17. Butler J, Khan MS, Mori C, et al. Minimal clinically important difference in quality of life scores for patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction. Eur J Heart Fail. 2020;22:999-1005.
  • 18. Arnold S V, Spertus JA, Lei Y, et al. Use of the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire for monitoring health status in patients with aortic stenosis. Circ Heart Fail. 2013;6:61-67.
  • 19. Herdman M, Gudex C, Lloyd A, et al. Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Qual Life Res. 2011;20: 1727-1736.
  • 20. Hernandez G, Garin O, Pardo Y, et al. Validity of the EQ-5D-5L and reference norms for the Spanish population. Qual Life Res. 2018;27:2337-2348.
  • 21. Ramos-Goñi JM, Pinto-Prades JL, Oppe M, Cabasés JM, Serrano-Aguilar P, Rivero-Arias O. Valuation and Modeling of EQ-5D-5L Health States Using a Hybrid Approach. Med Care. 2017;55:e51-e58.
  • 22. Ware JE, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care. 1992;30:473-483.
  • 23. Vilagut G, Ferrer M, Rajmil L, et al. The Spanish version of the Short Form 36 Health Survey: a decade of experience and new developments. Gac Sanit. 2005;19:135-150.
  • 24. Baron SJ, Thourani VH, Kodali S, et al. Effect of SAPIEN 3 Transcatheter Valve Implantation on Health Status in Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis at Intermediate Surgical Risk: Results From the PARTNER S3i Trial. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2018;11:1188-1198.
  • 25. Barbanti M, van Mourik MS, Spence MS, et al. Optimising patient discharge management after transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation: the multicentre European FAST-TAVI trial. EuroIntervention. 2019;15:147-154.
  • 26. Hemmann K, Sirotina M, De Rosa S, et al. The STS score is the strongest predictor of long-term survival following transcatheter aortic valve implantation, whereas access route (transapical versus transfemoral) has no predictive value beyond the periprocedural phase. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2013;17:359-364.
  • 27. Green P, Arnold S V, Cohen DJ, et al. Relation of frailty to outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (from the PARTNER trial). Am J Cardiol. 2015;116:264-269.
  • 28. Goudzwaard JA, de Ronde-Tillmans MJAG, El Faquir N, et al. The Erasmus Frailty Score is associated with delirium and 1-year mortality after Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in older patients. The TAVI Care & Cure program. Int J Cardiol. 2019;276:48-52.
Datuen iturria: Dialnet