Lower mortality in an all-comers aortic stenosis population treated with TAVI in comparison to SAVR
Within the last years TAVI—especially transfemoral/transvascular TAVI—has proven to be a valuable therapeutic option for most patients suffering from AS. Here, we present the outcome of a complete dataset of all patients undergoing aortic valve replacement in Germany in 2018.
The data of all aortic valve procedures performed in Germany in 2018 derive from the mandatory nationwide quality control program. Patients were stratified with a new version of the German Aortic valve score (AKL Score) divided in different risk stratification depending on the treatment with either a catheter based (TV-TAVI) or surgical (iSAVR) approach. In-hospital outcomes have been compared between the two approaches.
19,317 transvascular (TV)–TAVI procedures were carried out. In contrast to this steady growth, the number of iSAVR andtransapical (TA) -TAVI procedures declined. In-hospital mortality after TV-TAVI (2.5%) was lower when compared to iSAVR (3.1%) as well as TA-TAVI (5.7%) in-hospital mortality after TV-TAVI was significantly lowest (Fig. 2) with an in-hospital mortality rate of 2.5%. TV-TAVI was the only approach with an observed vs. expected mortality ratio < 1 according to the used risk prediction model.
TV-TAVI is more often performed and shows lower in-hospital mortality than iSAVR. TV-TAVI has replaced iSAVR as the gold-standard concerning in-hospital outcome in aortic stenosis management.
KeywordsTAVR TAVI Mortality SAVR Real-world Registry
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
HM received speaker honoraria/proctor fees from Abbott, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Edwards; OH and JB received proctor fees from Boston Scientific. LG receives speaker honoraria from Edwards and Abbott.
- 1.Leon M, Smith C, Mack M, Miller D, Moses J, Svensson L, Tuzcu M, Webb J, Fontana G, Makkar R, Brown D, Block P, Guyton R, Pichard A, Bavaria J, Herrmann H, Douglas P, Peterson J, Akin J, Anderson W, Wand D, Pcocock S for the PTI (2010) Transcatheter aortic-valve implantation for aortic stenosis in patients who cannot undergo surgery. N Engl J Med 363:1597–1607CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 2.Smith C, Leon M, Mack M, Miller D, Moses J, Svnesson L, Tuzcu E, Webb J, Fontana G, Makkar R, Williams M, Dewey T, Kapadia S, Babaliaros V, Thourani V, Corso P, Pichard A, Bavaria J, Herrmann H, Akin J, Anderson W, Wang D, PS for the PTI (2011) Transcatheter versus surgical aotic-valve replacement in high-risk patients. N Engl J Med 364:2187–2198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8.Bekeredjian R, Szabo G, Balaban Ü et al (2018) Patients at low surgical risk as defined by the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Score undergoing isolated interventional or surgical aortic valve implantation: in-hospital data and 1-year results from the German Aortic Valve Registry (GARY). Eur Heart J. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehy699 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.Baumgartner H, Falk V, Bax JJ et al (2017) 2017 ESC/EACTS Guidelines for the management of valvular heart disease The Task Force for the Management of Valvular Heart Disease of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European. Eur Heart J 38:2739–2791. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehx391 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar