Prótesis percutáneas autoexpandibles para la estenosis aórtica: resultados a corto plazo y comparación hemodinámica tras emparejamiento

Abstract

Introduction and objectivesAortic self-expandable (SE) transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) devices are particularly useful for patients with aortic stenosis and small/tortuous vessels, small aortic annuli, or low coronary ostia. However, it is unclear whether the growing range of SE devices shows comparable hemodynamic and clinical outcomes. We aimed to determine the differential hemodynamic (residual valve area and regurgitation) and clinical outcomes of these devices in comparable scenarios. MethodsAll patients were enrolled from 4 institutions and were managed with 4 different SE TAVI devices. Baseline and follow-up clinical data were collected and echocardiographic tests blindly and centrally analyzed. Patients were compared according to valve type and a 1:1 matched comparison was performed according to degree of calcification, aortic annulus dimensions, left ventricular ejection fraction, and body surface area. ResultsIn total, 514 patients were included (Evolut R/PRO, 217; ACURATE neo, 107; ALLEGRA, 102; Portico, 88). Surgical risk scores were comparable in the unmatched population. No differences were observed in the post-TAVI regurgitation rate and in in-hospital mortality (2.7%). The rate of pacemaker implantation at discharge was significantly different among devices (P=.049), with Portico showing the highest rate (23%) and ACURATE neo the lowest (9.5%); Evolut R/PRO and ALLEGRA had rates of 15.9% and 21.2%, respectively. The adjusted comparison showed worse residual TAVI gradients and aortic valve area with ACURATE neo vs ALLEGRA (P=.001) but the latter had higher risk of valve embolization and a tendency for more cerebrovascular events. ConclusionsA matched comparison of 4 SE TAVI devices showed no differences regarding residual aortic regurgitation and in-hospital mortality.