In-hospital outcomes following percutaneous versus surgical intervention in the treatment of aortic stenosis and concomitant coronary artery disease.

Concomitant coronary artery disease (CAD) is prevalent among aortic stenosis patients; however the optimal therapeutic strategy remains debated. We investigated periprocedural outcomes among patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation with percutaneous coronary intervention (TAVI/PCI) vs surgical aortic valve replacement with coronary artery bypass grafting (SAVR/CABG) for aortic stenosis with CAD. Using discharge data from the Spanish National Health System, we identified 6194 patients (5217 SAVR/CABG and 977 TAVI/PCI) between 2016 and 2019. Propensity score matching was adjusted for baseline characteristics. The primary outcome was in-hospital all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes were in-hospital complications and 30-day cardiovascular readmission. Matching resulted in 774 pairs. In-hospital all-cause mortality was more common in the SAVR/CABG group (3.4% vs 9.4%, P <.001) as was periprocedural stroke (0.9% vs 2.2%; P=.004), acute kidney injury (4.3% vs 16.0%, P <.001), blood transfusion (9.6% vs 21.1%, P <.001), and hospital-acquired pneumonia (0.1% vs 1.7%, P=.001). Permanent pacemaker implantation was higher for matched TAVI/PCI (12.0% vs 5.7%, P <.001). Lower volume centers (< 130 procedures/y) had higher in-hospital all-cause mortality for both procedures: TAVI/PCI (3.6% vs 2.9%, P <.001) and SAVR/CABG (8.3 vs 6.8%, P <.001). Thirty-day cardiovascular readmission did not differ between groups. In this large contemporary nationwide study, percutaneous management of aortic stenosis and CAD with TAVI/PCI had lower in-hospital mortality and morbidity than surgical intervention. Higher volume centers had less in-hospital mortality in both groups. Dedicated national high-volume heart centers warrant further investigation.

McInerney A ，García Márquez M ，Tirado-Conte G ，Bernal JL ，Fernández-Pérez C ，Jiménez-Quevedo P ，Gonzalo N ，Núñez-Gil I ，Del Prado N ，Escaned J ，Fernández-Ortiz A ，Elola J ，Nombela-Franco L ... -  《-》

Trends and outcomes of combined percutaneous (TAVI+PCI) and surgical approach (SAVR+CABG) for patients with aortic valve and coronary artery disease: A National Readmission Database (NRD) analysis.

In patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) and concomitant severe coronary artery disease (CAD), the relative merits of a combined percutaneous (transcatheter aortic valve implantation [TAVI] and percutaneous coronary intervention [PCI]] versus surgical approach (surgical aortic valve replacement [SAVR] and coronary artery bypass graft [CABG]) remain unknown. To determine the utility of combined percutaneous versus surgical approaches in patients with severe AS and CAD. The National Readmission Database (NRD) (2015-2019) was queried to identify all cases of TAVI+PCI and SAVR+CABG. The adjusted odds ratios (aOR) of mortality, stroke, and its composite (major adverse cardiovascular events [MACE]) were calculated using a propensity-score matched (PSM) analysis. A total of 89,314 (5358 TAVI+PCI, 83,956 SAVR+CABG) patients were included in the crude analysis. There was a gradual increase in the utilization of TAVI+PCI from 2016 to 2019 by 2%-4% per year. Using PSM, a subset of 11,361 (5358 TAVI+PCI, 6003 SAVR+CABG) patients with a balanced set of demographics and baseline comorbidities was selected. During index hospitalization, the adjusted odds of MACE (aOR 0.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.62-0.83), and all-cause mortality (aOR 0.68, 95% CI 0.57-0.81) were significantly lower in patients undergoing TAVI+PCI compared with SAVR+CABG. However, patients undergoing TAVI+PCI had a higher incidence of MACE (aOR 1.40, 95% CI 1.05-1.87), and mortality (aOR 1.75, 95% CI 1.22-2.50) at 30-days. The risk of index-admission (aOR 0.82, 95% CI 0.62-1.09) and 30-day (aOR 0.88, 95% CI 0.51-1.51) stroke was similar between the two groups. In selected patients with severe AS and concomitant CAD, a combined percutaneous approach (TAVR+PCI) compared with SAVR+CABG may confer a lower risk of MACE and mortality during index admission but a higher incidence of 30-day complications.

Ullah W ，Sarvepalli D ，Kumar A ，Zahid S ，Saleem S ，Muhammadzai HZU ，Khattak F ，Block PC ，Jaber WA ，Shishehbor MH ，Filby SJ ，Devireddy C ... -  《-》

Coronary revascularization during treatment of severe aortic stenosis: A meta-analysis of the complete percutaneous approach (PCI plus TAVR) versus the complete surgical approach (CABG plus SAVR).

The management of patients with coexisting severe aortic stenosis (AS) and coronary artery disease (CAD) is still facing a great deal of uncertainty when it comes to choosing between the entire surgical versus the complete percutaneous approaches, after accurately balancing risks versus outcomes. To evaluate clinical outcomes and mortality of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) plus percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) compared with surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) plus coronary arteries bypass grafting (CABG) procedures in patients with concomitant AS and CAD. Electronic databases of PubMed, EMBASE, and SCOPUS were searched for relevant articles assessing outcome parameters of interest. The study endpoints were the rate of overall myocardial infarction and stroke within 30 days and the rate of 30-day mortality and 2-year mortality between patients with TAVR/PCI and those with SAVR/CABG. Random-effect meta-analysis did not reveal any significant difference between 30-day safety outcomes: myocardial infarction (TAVR/PCI vs SAVR/CABG: odds ratio [OR]: 0.52; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.20-1.33; I2  = 0%), stroke (TAVR/PCI vs SAVR/CABG: OR: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.45-1.73; I2  = 0%). No significant difference in 30-day mortality (OR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.43-1.21; I2  = 0%) and 2-year mortality (OR: 1.50; 95% CI: 0.77-2.94; I2  = 81%) rate was noted between patients with TAVR/PCI and those with SAVR/CABG. When comparing the total percutaneous and total surgical treatment, no significant difference in short-term safety outcomes or early and late mortality was observed. More evidence is needed to guide the clinical decision.

Tarus A ，Tinica G ，Bacusca A ，Artene B ，Popa IV ，Burlacu A ... -  《-》

Complete transcatheter versus complete surgical treatment in patients with aortic valve stenosis and concomitant coronary artery disease: Study-level meta-analysis with reconstructed time-to-event data.

To compare outcomes of complete transcatheter (TAVI plus PCI) versus complete surgical (SAVR plus CABG) approach to treat patients with aortic stenosis (AS) and concomitant coronary artery disease (CAD). Study-level meta-analysis with reconstructed time-to-event data including studies published by November 2021. The primary endpoints were 30-day mortality, overall survival, and major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE). The secondary endpoints were 30-day stroke, myocardial infarction, and permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI); in-hospital major vascular events and acute kidney injury (AKI). Eight studies met our eligibility criteria, including a total of 33,286 patients (3448 for TAVI plus PCI and 29,838 for SAVR plus CABG). The pooled risk of 30-day mortality was lower for TAVI plus PCI (OR 0.63; 95% CI 0.51-0.80; p < .001). Patients undergoing TAVI plus PCI had lower risk of in-hospital AKI (OR 0.49; 95% CI 0.28-0.85; p = .01), however, higher risk of major vascular events (OR 7.33; 95% CI 1.80-29.85; p = .005) and higher risk of PPI (OR 2.96; 95% CI 1.80-4.85; p < .001). No statistically significant difference was observed for myocardial infarction and stroke between the groups. In the follow-up analyses, we observed a higher risk of mortality (HR 1.64, 95% CI 1.36-1.96, p < .001) and MACCE with TAVI plus PCI (HR 1.35 (95% CI 1.08-1.69, p = .009). Patients who undergo TAVI plus PCI (in comparison with SAVR plus CABG) initially experience lower rates of in-hospital death and AKI; however, they experience significantly lower survival rates and more MACCE at 5-year follow up. Structural heart surgeons and interventional cardiologists should consider these aspects when referring patients for one approach or the other.

Sá MP ，Sun T ，Fatehi Hassanabad A ，Awad AK ，Van den Eynde J ，Malin JH ，Sicouri S ，Torregrossa G ，Ruhparwar A ，Weymann A ，Ramlawi B ... -  《-》

TransCatheter aortic valve implantation and fractional flow reserve-guided percutaneous coronary intervention versus conventional surgical aortic valve replacement and coronary bypass grafting for treatment of patients with aortic valve stenosis and multi

Patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) frequently present with concomitant obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD). In those, current guidelines recommend combined coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) as the preferred treatment option, although this surgical approach is associated with a high rate of clinical events. Combined transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with or without FFR have evolved as a valid alternative for cardiac surgery in patients with AS and multivessel or advanced CAD. To date, no dedicated trial has prospectively evaluated the outcomes of a percutaneous versus surgical treatment for patients with both severe AS and CAD. To investigate whether fractional-flow reserve (FFR)-guided PCI and TAVI is noninferior to combined CABG and SAVR for the treatment of severe AS and multivessel or advanced CAD. The Transcatheter Valve and Vessels (TCW) trial (clinicaltrial.gov: NCT03424941) is a prospective, randomized, controlled, open label, international trial. Patients ≥ 70 years with severe AS and multivessel (≥ 2 vessels) or advanced CAD, deemed feasible by the heart team for both; a full percutaneous or surgical treatment, will be randomised in a 1:1 fashion to either FFR-guided PCI followed by TAVI (intervention arm) vs. CABG and SAVR (control arm). The primary endpoint is a patient-oriented composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, disabling stroke, unscheduled clinically-driven target vessel revascularization, valve reintervention, and life threatening or disabling bleeding at 1 year. The TCW trial is powered for noninferiority, and if met, superiority will be tested. Assuming a primary endpoint rate of 30% in the CABG-SAVR arm, with a significance level α of 5%, a noninferiority limit delta of 15% and a loss to follow-up of 2%, a total of 328 patients are needed to obtain a power of 90%. The primary endpoint analysis is performed on an intention-to-treat basis. The TCW Trial is the first prospective randomized trial that will study if a less invasive percutaneous treatment for severe AS and concomitant advanced CAD (i.e., FFR-guided PCI-TAVI) is noninferior to the guidelines recommended approach (CABG-SAVR).

Kedhi E ，Rroku A ，Hermanides RS ，Dambrink JH ，Singh S ，Berg JT ，van Ginkel DJ ，Hudec M ，Amoroso G ，Amat-Santos IJ ，Andreas M ，Teles RC ，Bonnet G ，Van Belle E ，Conradi L ，van Garsse L ，Wojakowski W ，Voudris V ，Sacha J ，Cervinka P ，Lipsic E ，Somi S ，Nombela-Franco L ，Postma S ，Piayda K ，De Luca G ，Malinofski K ，Modine T ... -  《-》