Transcatheter vs surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with interstitial lung disease.

BACKGROUND

Patients with underlying interstitial lung disease (ILD) who undergo cardiac surgery are at high risk of postoperative pulmonary complications. It remains unclear if transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) offers any benefit over surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in ILD patients with severe aortic stenosis.

METHODS

All adult patients with a diagnosis of ILD who underwent either a TAVR or isolated SAVR between January 2002 and December 2017 were retrospectively reviewed. Operative mortality, 30-day readmissions, and adjusted 1-year survival were compared between the two cohorts.

RESULTS

The overall cohort included 52 TAVR and 74 SAVR patients. While TAVR patients were significantly older (77.2 vs 72.9 years) with higher Society of Thoracic Surgeons predicted risk of mortality (STS-PROM) scores compared with SAVR patients (6.29 vs 4.49; all P < .02), operative mortality was similar (5.8% vs 4.1%; P =  .45). Rates of postoperative stroke, permanent pacemaker implantation, reintubation, and 30-day readmissions did not differ between the two groups (all P > .46). However, TAVR was associated with significantly shorter hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay, shorter ventilation times, and less requirement for ICU admission (all P < .05). Thirty-day readmissions and adjusted 1-year survival were also similar between the two groups (hazard ratio for TAVR vs SAVR = 1.34; 95% CI: 0.7-2.6).

CONCLUSIONS

Among ILD patients with symptomatic aortic stenosis, TAVR was associated with comparable operative and risk-adjusted 1-year survival to SAVR. TAVR patients also had shorter ventilator times, ICU and hospital stay despite being at higher risk. Together, our findings suggest that TAVR may be a better option in this unique cohort.