Share this page on LinkedIn
Share This Page on Google+
Share This Page on Twitter
tell someone about this page print this page
You are here: Contents > 2017 > Volume 26 Number 2 March 2017 > AORTIC VALVE DISEASE > Minimally Invasive Versus Transcatheter and Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement: A Propensity Matched Study

Minimally Invasive Versus Transcatheter and Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement: A Propensity Matched Study

Matthew D. Terwelp1, Vinod H. Thourani2, Yelin Zhao3, Prakash Balan3, Catalin Loghin3, Daniel Ocazionez4, Anthony Estrera1, Carson T. Hoffmann1, Vasilis C. Babaliaros5, Joseph Lamelas6, Tom C. Nguyen1,7

1Department of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery, University of Texas Medical School at Houston, Texas, USA
2Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
3Division of Cardiology, University of Texas Medical School at Houston, Texas, USA
4Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Imaging, University of Texas Medical School at Houston, Texas, USA
5Division of Cardiology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
6Department of Cardiac Surgery, Mount Sinai Medical Center, Miami Beach, Florida, USA
7Electronic correspondence: tom.c.nguyen@gmail.com

Background and aim of the study: An increasing number of options exist for the treatment of severe symptomatic aortic stenosis. The study aim was to compare short-term outcomes in patients undergoing surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR), minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (MIAVR), and transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).

Methods: A multi-institutional retrospective review of 2,571 patients undergoing SAVR (n = 842), MIAVR via right anterior thoracotomy (n = 699) and TAVR (n = 1,030) between 2011 and 2014 was conducted. TAVR patients were further stratified as either transfemoral (TF) or transapical (TA). Propensity matching was performed between MIAVR and SAVR (384 pairs), MIAVR and TA-TAVR (115 pairs), and MIAVR and TF-TAVR (247 pairs).

Results: Total numbers of AVR increased between 2011 and 2014. When stratified by procedure type, MIAVR and TF-TAVR accounted for most of the growth, while


TA-TAVR and SAVR each experienced a decreased volume. Propensity matched comparisons of SAVR, TF-TAVR, and TA-TAVR versus MIAVR revealed no difference in 30-day mortality. TF-TAVR versus MIAVR revealed that MIAVR had a decreased rate of stroke (0.4% versus 3.6%, p = 0.02) and increased atrial fibrillation (AF; 19.4% versus 4%, p <0.01). When compared to SAVR, MIAVR had a lower incidence of AF (19% versus 32.6%, p <0.01). MIAVR exhibited decreased ventilation time (27.2 versus 134 h, p = 0.03) and intensive care unit time (63.7 versus 92.7 h, p = 0.02) compared to TA-TAVR.

Conclusion: During recent years, MIAVR and TFTAVR have experienced significant growth in volume with near-comparable short-term outcomes, while SAVR and TA-TAVR volumes have declined. These results underscore the importance of surgeons adopting MIAVR and TF-TAVR techniques in order to offer patients optimal outcomes.

The Journal of Heart Valve Disease 2017;26:146-154


Minimally Invasive Versus Transcatheter and Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement: A Propensity Matched Study

Click the above hyperlink to view the article, right click (Ctrl click on a Mac) to open in a new browser window or tab.

Purchase this Article

Please click the button below to purchase this article. Single article purchases are provided at $50.00 per article. Upon clicking the button below, single article user account subscription details are requested and, upon successful payment, a single article user account is created. Single articles are availble in your account for seven days after purchase.