Results of surgical aortic valve replacement and transapical transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients with previous coronary artery bypass grafting

Francesco Onorati, Augusto D'Onofrio, Fausto Biancari, Stefano Salizzoni, Marisa De Feo, Marco Agrifoglio, Giovanni Mariscalco, Vincenzo Lucchetti, Antonio Messina, Francesco Musumeci, Giuseppe Santarpino, Giampiero Esposito, Francesco Santini, Paolo Magagna, Cesare Beghi, Marco Luigi Aiello, Ester Dalla Ratta, Carlo Savini, Giovanni Troise, Mauro CasseseTheodor Fischlein, Mattia Glauber, G. Passerone, Giuseppe Punta, Tatu Juvonen, Ottavio Alfieri, Davide Gabbieri, Domenico Mangino, Andrea Agostinelli, Ugolino Livi, Omar Di Gregorio, Alessandro Minati, Mauro Rinaldi, Gino Gerosa, Giuseppe Faggian

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

OBJECTIVES To evaluate the results of aortic valve replacement through sternotomic approach in redo scenarios (RAVR) vs transapical transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), in patients in the eighth decade of life or older already undergone previous coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). METHODS One hundred and twenty-six patients undergoing RAVR were compared with 113 patients undergoing TaTAVR in terms of 30-day mortality and Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 outcomes. The two groups were also analysed after propensity-matching. RESULTS TaTAVR patients demonstrated a higher incidence of 30-day mortality (P = 0.03), stroke (P = 0.04), major bleeding (P = 0.03), worse 'early safety' (P = 0.04) and lower permanent pacemaker implantation (P = 0.03). TaTAVR had higher follow-up hazard in all-cause mortality [hazard ratio (HR) 3.15, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.28-6.62; P <0.01] and cardiovascular mortality (HR 1.66, 95% CI 1.02-4.88; P = 0.04). Propensity-matched patients showed comparable 30-day outcome in terms of survival, major morbidity and early safety, with only a lower incidence of transfusions after TaTAVR (10.7% vs RAVR: 57.1%; P <0.01). A trend towards lower Acute Kidney Injury Network Classification 2/3 (3.6% vs RAVR 21.4%; P = 0.05) and towards a lower freedom from all-cause mortality at follow-up (TaTAVR: 44.3 ± 21.3% vs RAVR: 86.6 ± 9.3%; P =. 08) was demonstrated after TaTAVR, although cardiovascular mortality was comparable (TaTAVR: 86.5 ± 9.7% vs RAVR: 95.2 ± 4.6%; P = 0.52). Follow-up freedom from stroke, acute heart failure, reintervention on AVR and thrombo-embolisms were comparable (P = NS). EuroSCORE II (P = 0.02), perioperative stroke (P = 0.01) and length of hospitalization (P = 0.02) were the determinants of all-cause mortality at follow-up, whereas perioperative stroke (P = 0.03) and length of hospitalization (P = 0.04) impacted cardiovascular mortality at follow-up. CONCLUSIONS Reported differences in mortality and morbidity after TaTAVR and RAVR reflect differences in baseline risk profiles. Given the lower trend for renal complications, patients at higher perioperative renal risk might be better served by TaTAVR.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)806-812
Number of pages7
JournalInteractive Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery
Volume22
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jun 25 2016

Fingerprint

Aortic Valve
Surgical Instruments
Coronary Artery Bypass
Mortality
Stroke
Hospitalization
Confidence Intervals
Morbidity
Kidney
Safety
Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement
Incidence
Embolism
Acute Kidney Injury
Heart Failure
Hemorrhage
Survival
Research

Keywords

  • Aortic valve disease
  • Aortic valve replacement
  • Bioprosthesis malfunction
  • Redo
  • Transapical transcatheter aortic valve replacement

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
  • Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
  • Surgery

Cite this

Results of surgical aortic valve replacement and transapical transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients with previous coronary artery bypass grafting. / Onorati, Francesco; D'Onofrio, Augusto; Biancari, Fausto; Salizzoni, Stefano; De Feo, Marisa; Agrifoglio, Marco; Mariscalco, Giovanni; Lucchetti, Vincenzo; Messina, Antonio; Musumeci, Francesco; Santarpino, Giuseppe; Esposito, Giampiero; Santini, Francesco; Magagna, Paolo; Beghi, Cesare; Aiello, Marco Luigi; Ratta, Ester Dalla; Savini, Carlo; Troise, Giovanni; Cassese, Mauro; Fischlein, Theodor; Glauber, Mattia; Passerone, G.; Punta, Giuseppe; Juvonen, Tatu; Alfieri, Ottavio; Gabbieri, Davide; Mangino, Domenico; Agostinelli, Andrea; Livi, Ugolino; Di Gregorio, Omar; Minati, Alessandro; Rinaldi, Mauro; Gerosa, Gino; Faggian, Giuseppe.

In: Interactive Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery, Vol. 22, No. 6, 25.06.2016, p. 806-812.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Onorati, F, D'Onofrio, A, Biancari, F, Salizzoni, S, De Feo, M, Agrifoglio, M, Mariscalco, G, Lucchetti, V, Messina, A, Musumeci, F, Santarpino, G, Esposito, G, Santini, F, Magagna, P, Beghi, C, Aiello, ML, Ratta, ED, Savini, C, Troise, G, Cassese, M, Fischlein, T, Glauber, M, Passerone, G, Punta, G, Juvonen, T, Alfieri, O, Gabbieri, D, Mangino, D, Agostinelli, A, Livi, U, Di Gregorio, O, Minati, A, Rinaldi, M, Gerosa, G & Faggian, G 2016, 'Results of surgical aortic valve replacement and transapical transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients with previous coronary artery bypass grafting', Interactive Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery, vol. 22, no. 6, pp. 806-812. https://doi.org/10.1093/icvts/ivw049
Onorati, Francesco ; D'Onofrio, Augusto ; Biancari, Fausto ; Salizzoni, Stefano ; De Feo, Marisa ; Agrifoglio, Marco ; Mariscalco, Giovanni ; Lucchetti, Vincenzo ; Messina, Antonio ; Musumeci, Francesco ; Santarpino, Giuseppe ; Esposito, Giampiero ; Santini, Francesco ; Magagna, Paolo ; Beghi, Cesare ; Aiello, Marco Luigi ; Ratta, Ester Dalla ; Savini, Carlo ; Troise, Giovanni ; Cassese, Mauro ; Fischlein, Theodor ; Glauber, Mattia ; Passerone, G. ; Punta, Giuseppe ; Juvonen, Tatu ; Alfieri, Ottavio ; Gabbieri, Davide ; Mangino, Domenico ; Agostinelli, Andrea ; Livi, Ugolino ; Di Gregorio, Omar ; Minati, Alessandro ; Rinaldi, Mauro ; Gerosa, Gino ; Faggian, Giuseppe. / Results of surgical aortic valve replacement and transapical transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients with previous coronary artery bypass grafting. In: Interactive Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery. 2016 ; Vol. 22, No. 6. pp. 806-812.
@article{7002920ba6e64cf782f21fa85e9a6e56,
title = "Results of surgical aortic valve replacement and transapical transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients with previous coronary artery bypass grafting",
abstract = "OBJECTIVES To evaluate the results of aortic valve replacement through sternotomic approach in redo scenarios (RAVR) vs transapical transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), in patients in the eighth decade of life or older already undergone previous coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). METHODS One hundred and twenty-six patients undergoing RAVR were compared with 113 patients undergoing TaTAVR in terms of 30-day mortality and Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 outcomes. The two groups were also analysed after propensity-matching. RESULTS TaTAVR patients demonstrated a higher incidence of 30-day mortality (P = 0.03), stroke (P = 0.04), major bleeding (P = 0.03), worse 'early safety' (P = 0.04) and lower permanent pacemaker implantation (P = 0.03). TaTAVR had higher follow-up hazard in all-cause mortality [hazard ratio (HR) 3.15, 95{\%} confidence interval (CI) 1.28-6.62; P <0.01] and cardiovascular mortality (HR 1.66, 95{\%} CI 1.02-4.88; P = 0.04). Propensity-matched patients showed comparable 30-day outcome in terms of survival, major morbidity and early safety, with only a lower incidence of transfusions after TaTAVR (10.7{\%} vs RAVR: 57.1{\%}; P <0.01). A trend towards lower Acute Kidney Injury Network Classification 2/3 (3.6{\%} vs RAVR 21.4{\%}; P = 0.05) and towards a lower freedom from all-cause mortality at follow-up (TaTAVR: 44.3 ± 21.3{\%} vs RAVR: 86.6 ± 9.3{\%}; P =. 08) was demonstrated after TaTAVR, although cardiovascular mortality was comparable (TaTAVR: 86.5 ± 9.7{\%} vs RAVR: 95.2 ± 4.6{\%}; P = 0.52). Follow-up freedom from stroke, acute heart failure, reintervention on AVR and thrombo-embolisms were comparable (P = NS). EuroSCORE II (P = 0.02), perioperative stroke (P = 0.01) and length of hospitalization (P = 0.02) were the determinants of all-cause mortality at follow-up, whereas perioperative stroke (P = 0.03) and length of hospitalization (P = 0.04) impacted cardiovascular mortality at follow-up. CONCLUSIONS Reported differences in mortality and morbidity after TaTAVR and RAVR reflect differences in baseline risk profiles. Given the lower trend for renal complications, patients at higher perioperative renal risk might be better served by TaTAVR.",
keywords = "Aortic valve disease, Aortic valve replacement, Bioprosthesis malfunction, Redo, Transapical transcatheter aortic valve replacement",
author = "Francesco Onorati and Augusto D'Onofrio and Fausto Biancari and Stefano Salizzoni and {De Feo}, Marisa and Marco Agrifoglio and Giovanni Mariscalco and Vincenzo Lucchetti and Antonio Messina and Francesco Musumeci and Giuseppe Santarpino and Giampiero Esposito and Francesco Santini and Paolo Magagna and Cesare Beghi and Aiello, {Marco Luigi} and Ratta, {Ester Dalla} and Carlo Savini and Giovanni Troise and Mauro Cassese and Theodor Fischlein and Mattia Glauber and G. Passerone and Giuseppe Punta and Tatu Juvonen and Ottavio Alfieri and Davide Gabbieri and Domenico Mangino and Andrea Agostinelli and Ugolino Livi and {Di Gregorio}, Omar and Alessandro Minati and Mauro Rinaldi and Gino Gerosa and Giuseppe Faggian",
year = "2016",
month = "6",
day = "25",
doi = "10.1093/icvts/ivw049",
language = "English",
volume = "22",
pages = "806--812",
journal = "Interactive Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery",
issn = "1569-9293",
publisher = "European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Results of surgical aortic valve replacement and transapical transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients with previous coronary artery bypass grafting

AU - Onorati, Francesco

AU - D'Onofrio, Augusto

AU - Biancari, Fausto

AU - Salizzoni, Stefano

AU - De Feo, Marisa

AU - Agrifoglio, Marco

AU - Mariscalco, Giovanni

AU - Lucchetti, Vincenzo

AU - Messina, Antonio

AU - Musumeci, Francesco

AU - Santarpino, Giuseppe

AU - Esposito, Giampiero

AU - Santini, Francesco

AU - Magagna, Paolo

AU - Beghi, Cesare

AU - Aiello, Marco Luigi

AU - Ratta, Ester Dalla

AU - Savini, Carlo

AU - Troise, Giovanni

AU - Cassese, Mauro

AU - Fischlein, Theodor

AU - Glauber, Mattia

AU - Passerone, G.

AU - Punta, Giuseppe

AU - Juvonen, Tatu

AU - Alfieri, Ottavio

AU - Gabbieri, Davide

AU - Mangino, Domenico

AU - Agostinelli, Andrea

AU - Livi, Ugolino

AU - Di Gregorio, Omar

AU - Minati, Alessandro

AU - Rinaldi, Mauro

AU - Gerosa, Gino

AU - Faggian, Giuseppe

PY - 2016/6/25

Y1 - 2016/6/25

N2 - OBJECTIVES To evaluate the results of aortic valve replacement through sternotomic approach in redo scenarios (RAVR) vs transapical transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), in patients in the eighth decade of life or older already undergone previous coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). METHODS One hundred and twenty-six patients undergoing RAVR were compared with 113 patients undergoing TaTAVR in terms of 30-day mortality and Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 outcomes. The two groups were also analysed after propensity-matching. RESULTS TaTAVR patients demonstrated a higher incidence of 30-day mortality (P = 0.03), stroke (P = 0.04), major bleeding (P = 0.03), worse 'early safety' (P = 0.04) and lower permanent pacemaker implantation (P = 0.03). TaTAVR had higher follow-up hazard in all-cause mortality [hazard ratio (HR) 3.15, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.28-6.62; P <0.01] and cardiovascular mortality (HR 1.66, 95% CI 1.02-4.88; P = 0.04). Propensity-matched patients showed comparable 30-day outcome in terms of survival, major morbidity and early safety, with only a lower incidence of transfusions after TaTAVR (10.7% vs RAVR: 57.1%; P <0.01). A trend towards lower Acute Kidney Injury Network Classification 2/3 (3.6% vs RAVR 21.4%; P = 0.05) and towards a lower freedom from all-cause mortality at follow-up (TaTAVR: 44.3 ± 21.3% vs RAVR: 86.6 ± 9.3%; P =. 08) was demonstrated after TaTAVR, although cardiovascular mortality was comparable (TaTAVR: 86.5 ± 9.7% vs RAVR: 95.2 ± 4.6%; P = 0.52). Follow-up freedom from stroke, acute heart failure, reintervention on AVR and thrombo-embolisms were comparable (P = NS). EuroSCORE II (P = 0.02), perioperative stroke (P = 0.01) and length of hospitalization (P = 0.02) were the determinants of all-cause mortality at follow-up, whereas perioperative stroke (P = 0.03) and length of hospitalization (P = 0.04) impacted cardiovascular mortality at follow-up. CONCLUSIONS Reported differences in mortality and morbidity after TaTAVR and RAVR reflect differences in baseline risk profiles. Given the lower trend for renal complications, patients at higher perioperative renal risk might be better served by TaTAVR.

AB - OBJECTIVES To evaluate the results of aortic valve replacement through sternotomic approach in redo scenarios (RAVR) vs transapical transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), in patients in the eighth decade of life or older already undergone previous coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). METHODS One hundred and twenty-six patients undergoing RAVR were compared with 113 patients undergoing TaTAVR in terms of 30-day mortality and Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 outcomes. The two groups were also analysed after propensity-matching. RESULTS TaTAVR patients demonstrated a higher incidence of 30-day mortality (P = 0.03), stroke (P = 0.04), major bleeding (P = 0.03), worse 'early safety' (P = 0.04) and lower permanent pacemaker implantation (P = 0.03). TaTAVR had higher follow-up hazard in all-cause mortality [hazard ratio (HR) 3.15, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.28-6.62; P <0.01] and cardiovascular mortality (HR 1.66, 95% CI 1.02-4.88; P = 0.04). Propensity-matched patients showed comparable 30-day outcome in terms of survival, major morbidity and early safety, with only a lower incidence of transfusions after TaTAVR (10.7% vs RAVR: 57.1%; P <0.01). A trend towards lower Acute Kidney Injury Network Classification 2/3 (3.6% vs RAVR 21.4%; P = 0.05) and towards a lower freedom from all-cause mortality at follow-up (TaTAVR: 44.3 ± 21.3% vs RAVR: 86.6 ± 9.3%; P =. 08) was demonstrated after TaTAVR, although cardiovascular mortality was comparable (TaTAVR: 86.5 ± 9.7% vs RAVR: 95.2 ± 4.6%; P = 0.52). Follow-up freedom from stroke, acute heart failure, reintervention on AVR and thrombo-embolisms were comparable (P = NS). EuroSCORE II (P = 0.02), perioperative stroke (P = 0.01) and length of hospitalization (P = 0.02) were the determinants of all-cause mortality at follow-up, whereas perioperative stroke (P = 0.03) and length of hospitalization (P = 0.04) impacted cardiovascular mortality at follow-up. CONCLUSIONS Reported differences in mortality and morbidity after TaTAVR and RAVR reflect differences in baseline risk profiles. Given the lower trend for renal complications, patients at higher perioperative renal risk might be better served by TaTAVR.

KW - Aortic valve disease

KW - Aortic valve replacement

KW - Bioprosthesis malfunction

KW - Redo

KW - Transapical transcatheter aortic valve replacement

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84974527983&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84974527983&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1093/icvts/ivw049

DO - 10.1093/icvts/ivw049

M3 - Article

VL - 22

SP - 806

EP - 812

JO - Interactive Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery

JF - Interactive Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery

SN - 1569-9293

IS - 6

ER -