Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, The Heart Centre, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, The Heart Centre, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015 May 26;65(20):2184-94. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2015.03.014. Epub 2015 Mar 15.
Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is an option in certain high-risk surgical patients with severe aortic valve stenosis. It is unknown whether TAVR can be safely introduced to lower-risk patients.
The NOTION (Nordic Aortic Valve Intervention Trial) randomized clinical trial compared TAVR with surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in an all-comers patient cohort.
Patients ≥ 70 years old with severe aortic valve stenosis and no significant coronary artery disease were randomized 1:1 to TAVR using a self-expanding bioprosthesis versus SAVR. The primary outcome was the composite rate of death from any cause, stroke, or myocardial infarction (MI) at 1 year.
A total of 280 patients were randomized at 3 Nordic centers. Mean age was 79.1 years, and 81.8% were considered low-risk patients. In the intention-to-treat population, no significant difference in the primary endpoint was found (13.1% vs. 16.3%; p = 0.43 for superiority). The result did not change in the as-treated population. No difference in the rate of cardiovascular death or prosthesis reintervention was found. Compared with SAVR-treated patients, TAVR-treated patients had more conduction abnormalities requiring pacemaker implantation, larger improvement in effective orifice area, more total aortic valve regurgitation, and higher New York Heart Association functional class at 1 year. SAVR-treated patients had more major or life-threatening bleeding, cardiogenic shock, acute kidney injury (stage II or III), and new-onset or worsening atrial fibrillation at 30 days than did TAVR-treated patients.
In the NOTION trial, no significant difference between TAVR and SAVR was found for the composite rate of death from any cause, stroke, or MI after 1 year. (Nordic Aortic Valve Intervention Trial [NOTION]; NCT01057173).
经导管主动脉瓣置换术(TAVR)是某些高危外科手术患者严重主动脉瓣狭窄的一种选择。目前尚不清楚 TAVR 是否可以安全地用于低危患者。
NOTION(北欧主动脉瓣介入试验)随机临床试验比较了 TAVR 与外科主动脉瓣置换术(SAVR)在所有患者队列中的疗效。
≥70 岁、有严重主动脉瓣狭窄且无明显冠状动脉疾病的患者,按照 1:1 比例随机分为 TAVR 组(使用自膨式生物瓣)和 SAVR 组。主要终点是 1 年时全因死亡、卒中和心肌梗死(MI)的复合发生率。
共 3 个北欧中心的 280 例患者被随机分组。平均年龄为 79.1 岁,81.8%被认为是低危患者。意向治疗人群中,主要终点无显著差异(13.1% vs. 16.3%;p = 0.43,优效性检验)。在实际治疗人群中,结果也没有变化。两组间心血管死亡或再次瓣膜介入治疗率也没有差异。与 SAVR 治疗患者相比,TAVR 治疗患者在 1 年时需要心脏起搏器植入的传导异常更多、有效瓣口面积改善更大、总主动脉瓣反流更多,纽约心脏协会心功能分级更高。与 TAVR 治疗患者相比,SAVR 治疗患者在 30 天时的大出血、心源性休克、急性肾损伤(Ⅱ或Ⅲ期)、新发或恶化的心房颤动发生率更高。
在 NOTION 试验中,TAVR 与 SAVR 治疗 1 年后的全因死亡、卒中和 MI 的复合发生率无显著差异。