1 Department of Medicine, VA Medical Center, USA.
2 Center for Cardiac and Pulmonary Rehabilitation, The Miriam Hospital, USA.
Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2018 Oct;25(15):1577-1584. doi: 10.1177/2047487318792099. Epub 2018 Aug 8.
Background Referral rates and outcomes of cardiac rehabilitation have not been evaluated in patients with transcatheter aortic valve replacement or compared with surgical aortic valve replacement. Method A retrospective cohort study was conducted in 488 patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement ( n = 199) and surgical aortic valve replacement ( n = 289) from a university-based statewide transcatheter aortic valve replacement/surgical aortic valve replacement program during 2015-2017. Cardiac rehabilitation consisted of supervised exercise, diet education, and stress and depression management. We compared changes from baseline in exercise duration and intensity during cardiac rehabilitation sessions, quality-of-life (36-Item Short-Form Health Survey), and psychosocial measures (anxiety, depression, mood, social support, and diet) between transcatheter aortic valve replacement and surgical aortic valve replacement patients using t-test and chi-square analyses. Results Of 488 patients, cardiac rehabilitation referral rates were similar at 41% (transcatheter aortic valve replacement 81/199 versus surgical aortic valve replacement 117/289), but enrollment rates were lower in transcatheter aortic valve replacement (27/199, 14%) versus surgical aortic valve replacement (102/289, 35%, p < 0.01). Among eligible patients, cardiac rehabilitation completion rates were lower in transcatheter aortic valve replacement (12%) than surgical aortic valve replacement (32%). Exercise intensity during cardiac rehabilitation improved in both groups in a similar fashion (transcatheter aortic valve replacement 1.03 ± 1.09 versus surgical aortic valve replacement 1.34 ± 1.15 metabolic equivalents), but increase in exercise duration was higher in transcatheter aortic valve replacement patients versus surgical aortic valve replacement patients (14.52 ± 6.42 versus 10.67 ± 8.38 min, p = 0.02). Improvement in physical composite score was higher in surgical aortic valve replacement versus transcatheter aortic valve replacement (8.72 ± 7.87 versus 2.36 ± 7.6, p = 0.02) while improvement in mental composite score was higher in transcatheter aortic valve replacement (8.19 ± 8.50) versus surgical aortic valve replacement (1.18 ± 7.23, p = 0.02). There was no significant difference between the two groups in improvement in psychosocial measures. Conclusion Cardiac rehabilitation enrollment was low in transcatheter aortic valve replacement patients versus surgical aortic valve replacement patients despite similar referral rates. Improvement in functional and quality-of-life performance was achieved in both transcatheter aortic valve replacement and surgical aortic valve replacement. Future studies should address obstacles for enrollment of transcatheter aortic valve replacement patients.
经导管主动脉瓣置换术(TAVR)患者的心脏康复转诊率和结局尚未得到评估,且尚未与外科主动脉瓣置换术(SAVR)进行比较。
这是一项回顾性队列研究,纳入了 2015 年至 2017 年期间在一个基于大学的全州 TAVR/SAVR 项目中接受 TAVR(n=199)和 SAVR(n=289)的 488 例患者。心脏康复包括监督运动、饮食教育以及压力和抑郁管理。我们使用 t 检验和卡方分析比较了 TAVR 和 SAVR 患者在心脏康复期间运动时间和强度、生活质量(36 项简短健康调查问卷)和心理社会指标(焦虑、抑郁、情绪、社会支持和饮食)的基线变化。
在 488 例患者中,心脏康复转诊率相似,分别为 41%(TAVR 81/199 与 SAVR 117/289),但 TAVR 患者的登记率较低(27/199,14%),SAVR 患者为 35%(102/289,p<0.01)。在符合条件的患者中,TAVR 患者的心脏康复完成率(12%)低于 SAVR 患者(32%)。两组患者的心脏康复期间运动强度均以相似的方式改善(TAVR 1.03±1.09 与 SAVR 1.34±1.15 代谢当量),但 TAVR 患者的运动时间增加高于 SAVR 患者(14.52±6.42 与 10.67±8.38 min,p=0.02)。SAVR 患者的生理综合评分改善高于 TAVR 患者(8.72±7.87 与 2.36±7.6,p=0.02),而 TAVR 患者的心理综合评分改善高于 SAVR 患者(8.19±8.50 与 1.18±7.23,p=0.02)。两组患者的心理社会指标改善均无显著差异。
尽管转诊率相似,但 TAVR 患者的心脏康复登记率仍低于 SAVR 患者。TAVR 和 SAVR 均可改善患者的功能和生活质量。未来的研究应解决 TAVR 患者登记的障碍。