Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, Nebraska.
Department of Health Services Research and Administration, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, Nebraska.
Am J Cardiol. 2019 Sep 1;124(5):763-771. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2019.05.044. Epub 2019 Jun 7.
Aortic stenosis (AS) and regurgitation (AR) may be treated with surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR), transcatheter AVR (TAVR), or medical therapy (MT). Data are lacking regarding the usage of SAVR, TAVR, and MT for patients hospitalized with aortic valve disease and the characteristics of the patients and hospitals associated with each therapy. From the Nationwide Readmissions Database, we determined utilization trends for SAVR, TAVR, and MT in patients with aortic valve disease admitted from 2012 to 2016 for valve replacement, heart failure, unstable angina, non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction, or syncope. We also performed multinomial logistic regressions to investigate associations between patient and hospital characteristics and treatment. Among 366,909 patients hospitalized for aortic valve disease, there was a 48.1% annual increase from 2012 through 2016. Overall, 19.9%, 6.7%, and 73.4% of patients received SAVR, TAVR, and MT, respectively. SAVR decreased from 21.9% in 2012 to 18.5% in 2016, whereas TAVR increased from 2.6% to 12.5%, and MT decreased from 75.5% to 69.0%. Older age, female sex, greater severity of illness, more admission diagnoses, not-for-profit hospitals, large hospitals, and urban teaching hospitals were associated with greater use of TAVR. In multivariable analysis, likelihood of TAVR relative to SAVR increased 4.57-fold (95% confidence interval 4.21 to 4.97). TAVR has increased at the expense of both SAVR and MT, a novel finding. However, this increase in TAVR was distributed inequitably, with certain patients more likely to receive TAVR certain hospitals more likely to provide TAVR. With the expected expansion of indications, inequitable access to TAVR must be addressed.
主动脉瓣狭窄 (AS) 和反流 (AR) 可通过外科主动脉瓣置换术 (SAVR)、经导管主动脉瓣置换术 (TAVR) 或药物治疗 (MT) 进行治疗。关于因主动脉瓣疾病住院的患者使用 SAVR、TAVR 和 MT 的数据尚缺乏,以及与每种治疗方法相关的患者和医院特征。我们从全国再入院数据库中确定了 2012 年至 2016 年期间因瓣膜置换、心力衰竭、不稳定型心绞痛、非 ST 段抬高型心肌梗死或晕厥而入院的主动脉瓣疾病患者中 SAVR、TAVR 和 MT 的使用趋势。我们还进行了多项逻辑回归分析,以研究患者和医院特征与治疗之间的关系。在 366909 名因主动脉瓣疾病住院的患者中,2012 年至 2016 年期间每年增加 48.1%。总体而言,分别有 19.9%、6.7%和 73.4%的患者接受了 SAVR、TAVR 和 MT。SAVR 从 2012 年的 21.9%下降到 2016 年的 18.5%,而 TAVR 从 2.6%增加到 12.5%,MT 从 75.5%下降到 69.0%。年龄较大、女性、疾病严重程度较高、更多入院诊断、非营利性医院、大型医院和城市教学医院与 TAVR 的使用增加相关。在多变量分析中,TAVR 相对于 SAVR 的可能性增加了 4.57 倍 (95%置信区间 4.21 至 4.97)。TAVR 的使用增加了,SAVR 和 MT 的使用减少了,这是一个新发现。然而,这种 TAVR 的增加分布不均,某些患者更有可能接受 TAVR,某些医院更有可能提供 TAVR。随着适应证的预期扩大,必须解决 TAVR 获得机会的不平等问题。