Erlebach Magdalena, Head Stuart J, Mylotte Darren, Leon Martin B, Serruys Patrick W, Kappetein A Pieter, Martucci Giuseppe, Genereux Philippe, Windecker Stephan, Lange Rüdiger, Piazza Nicolo
Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, German Heart Center Munich, Munich, Germany.
EuroIntervention. 2016 Jun 20;12(3):375-80. doi: 10.4244/EIJV12I3A60.
The Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC) endpoint definitions were established to standardise the reporting of clinical outcomes following transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). It remains unclear, however, to what extent and in which manner these definitions are applied. Therefore, we sought to investigate the utilisation and adherence to VARC guidelines since their introduction in 2011 across peerreviewed TAVI-related publications.
We performed a systematic literature review to identify TAVI-related manuscripts published between February 2011 and February 2014. Manuscripts were categorised into three groups: a "compliant" group of manuscripts using only VARC-defined endpoints, a "non-compliant" group of manu scripts with only non-VARC-defined endpoints, and a "mixed compliant" group of manuscripts with both VARC- and non-VARC-defined endpoints. Multivariate analyses were performed to identify predictors of VARC use. Among 5,023 published manuscripts, 498 were included in the final analysis. At least one VARC definition was used in 275 (54%), while 223 (43%) did not use any VARC definitions. After publication of the first VARC manuscript (VARC-1, January 2011), VARC use increased from 31% (n=15) at six months to 69% (n=84) at 36 months. Following the publication of VARC-2 (October 2012), VARC-1 use declined (from 58% [n=47] to 36% [n=24]), while VARC-2 use increased from 4% (n=3) at six months to 35% (n=23) at 18 months. Of the manuscripts using VARC, 49 (10%) were classified as compliant and 226 (46%) as mixed compliant. The following endpoints were more often defined using VARC vs. non-VARC: myocardial infarction (64% vs. 36%); stroke (56% vs. 44%); bleeding (79% vs. 21%); vascular complications (70% vs. 30%); acute kidney injury (63% vs. 37%); reintervention (67% vs. 33%); and composite endpoints (52% vs. 48%). Mortality, valve dysfunction, TAVI-related complications, and quality of life were more often defined using non-VARC criteria.
Implementation of VARC criteria in peer-reviewed manuscripts has increased over time. There remain, however, a considerable number (43%) of publications that do not report outcomes according to VARC. These data will inform the future development of VARC criteria.
瓣膜学术研究联盟(VARC)制定了终点定义,以规范经导管主动脉瓣植入术(TAVI)后临床结局的报告。然而,目前尚不清楚这些定义在何种程度上以及以何种方式得到应用。因此,我们试图调查自2011年VARC指南推出以来,同行评审的TAVI相关出版物对其的使用和遵循情况。
我们进行了一项系统的文献综述,以识别2011年2月至2014年2月期间发表的TAVI相关手稿。手稿分为三组:仅使用VARC定义终点的“合规”组手稿;仅使用非VARC定义终点的“不合规”组手稿;同时使用VARC和非VARC定义终点的“混合合规”组手稿。进行多变量分析以确定使用VARC的预测因素。在5023篇已发表的手稿中,498篇纳入最终分析。275篇(54%)至少使用了一个VARC定义,而223篇(43%)未使用任何VARC定义。第一份VARC手稿(VARC-1,2011年1月)发表后,VARC的使用从6个月时的31%(n = 15)增加到36个月时的69%(n = 84)。VARC-2(2012年10月)发表后,VARC-1的使用下降(从58% [n = 47]降至36% [n = 24]),而VARC-2的使用从6个月时的4%(n = 3)增加到18个月时的35%(n = 23)。在使用VARC的手稿中,49篇(10%)被归类为合规,226篇(46%)为混合合规。与非VARC相比,以下终点更常使用VARC定义:心肌梗死(64%对36%);中风(56%对44%);出血(79%对21%);血管并发症(70%对30%);急性肾损伤(63%对37%);再次干预(67%对33%);以及复合终点(52%对48%)。死亡率、瓣膜功能障碍、TAVI相关并发症和生活质量更常使用非VARC标准定义。
随着时间的推移,同行评审手稿中VARC标准的实施有所增加。然而,仍有相当数量(43%)的出版物未根据VARC报告结局。这些数据将为VARC标准的未来发展提供参考。