Abstract 9809: Clinical Outcomes of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement vs.surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Durable Left Ventricular Assist Device

Abstract

Introduction: Patients with left ventricular assist device (LVAD) often develop aortic insufficiency (AI) requiring an intervention on the aortic valve. We sought to analyze the outcomes of patients with a history of LVAD who underwent either transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). Methods: The Nationwide Readmission Database (NRD) was used to extract relevant patient information from January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2018. The NRD is a nationally representative sample of all-payer discharges from U.S. non-federal hospitals. The primary outcome of interest was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included length of stay, inpatient outcomes, costs, and 30-day all-cause readmissions. Complex samples multivariable logistic and linear regression models were used to determine the association of procedure type with outcomes. Results: Among 148 hospitalizations with a history of LVAD, 87 underwent TAVR, and 61 underwent SAVR. The inpatient mortality in SAVR group was numerically higher compared to the TAVR cohort, however, it did not reach statistical significance. The use of invasive mechanical ventilation, cardiogenic shock, bleeding, and vascular complications were higher in the SAVR cohort compared to the TAVR cohort. The mean length of stay (in days) and costs were higher in the SAVR cohort compared to the TAVR cohort. The 30-day all-cause readmission rate was numerically higher in the SAVR group, however, it was not statistically significant (Table 1). Conclusions: TAVR in patients with LVAD is a viable treatment option for AI and potentially leads to better inpatient mortality and inpatient outcomes compared to patients who undergo SAVR.