Leiden University Scholarly Publications

Persistent URL of this record https://hdl.handle.net/1887/108756

In Collections

This item can be found in the following collections:

Ewe, S.H.; Marsan, N.A.; Pepi, M.; Delgado, V.; Tamborini, G.; Muratori, M.; ... ; Bax, J.J. (2010)

Impact of left ventricular systolic function on clinical and echocardiographic outcomes following transcatheter aortic valve implantation for severe aortic stenosis

Article / Letter to editor
Background This study aimed to evaluate the impact of baseline left ventricular (LV) systolic function on clinical and echocardiographic outcomes following transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Survival of patients undergoing TAVI was also compared with that of a population undergoing surgical aortic valve replacement. Methods One hundred forty-seven consecutive patients (mean age = 80 +/- 7 years) undergoing TAVI in 2 centers were included. Mean follow-up period was 9.1 +/- 5.1 months. Results At baseline, 34% of patients had impaired LV ejection fraction (LVEF) (<50%) and 66% had normal LVEF (>= 50%). Procedural success was similar in these 2 groups (94% vs 97%, P = .41). All patients achieved improvement in transvalvular hemodynamics. At follow-up, patients with a baseline LVEF <50% showed marked LV reverse remodeling, with improvement of LVEF (from 37% +/- 8% to 51% +/- 11%). Early and late mortality rates were not different between the 2 groups, despite a higher rate...Show moreBackground This study aimed to evaluate the impact of baseline left ventricular (LV) systolic function on clinical and echocardiographic outcomes following transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Survival of patients undergoing TAVI was also compared with that of a population undergoing surgical aortic valve replacement. Methods One hundred forty-seven consecutive patients (mean age = 80 +/- 7 years) undergoing TAVI in 2 centers were included. Mean follow-up period was 9.1 +/- 5.1 months. Results At baseline, 34% of patients had impaired LV ejection fraction (LVEF) (<50%) and 66% had normal LVEF (>= 50%). Procedural success was similar in these 2 groups (94% vs 97%, P = .41). All patients achieved improvement in transvalvular hemodynamics. At follow-up, patients with a baseline LVEF <50% showed marked LV reverse remodeling, with improvement of LVEF (from 37% +/- 8% to 51% +/- 11%). Early and late mortality rates were not different between the 2 groups, despite a higher rate of combined major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) in patients with a baseline LVEF <50%. The predictors of cumulative MACEs were baseline LVEF (HR = 0.97, 95% CI = 0.94-0.99) and preoperative frailty (HR = 4.20, 95% CI = 2.00-8.84). In addition, long-term survival of patients with impaired or normal LVEF was comparable with that of a matched population who underwent surgical aortic valve replacement. Conclusions TAVI resulted in significant improvement in LV function and survival benefit in high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis, regardless of baseline LVEF. Patients with a baseline LVEF <50% were at higher risk of combined MACEs. (Am Heart J 2010;160:1113-20.)Show less
society-of-cardiology elderly-patients replacement survival recommendations dysfunction guidelines interventions determinants reliability
All authors
Ewe, S.H.; Marsan, N.A.; Pepi, M.; Delgado, V.; Tamborini, G.; Muratori, M.; Ng, A.C.T.; Kley, F. van der; Weger, A. de; Schalij, M.J.; Fusari, M.; Biglioli, P.; Bax, J.J.
Date
2010-12-31
Journal
American Heart Journal
Volume
160
Issue
6
Pages
1113 - 1120
DOI
doi:10.1016/j.ahj.2010.09.003