Saint Luke's Mid America Heart Institute and University of Missouri-Kansas City, MO (S.V.A.).
Edwards Lifesciences, Inc, Irvine, CA (Y.Z.).
Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2022 Jan;15(1):e011375. doi: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.121.011375. Epub 2022 Jan 18.
Randomized trials have shown short- and mid-term benefits with transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement (TAVR versus SAVR) for patients at intermediate or low-risk for surgery. Frailty and prefrailty could explain some of this benefit due to an impaired ability to recover fully from a major surgical procedure.
We examined 2-year outcomes (survival and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire [KCCQ] scores) among patients at intermediate or low surgical risk treated with transfemoral-TAVR or SAVR within the PARTNER (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves) 2A trial, SAPIEN 3 intermediate-risk registry, and PARTNER 3 trial. Frailty was examined as a continuous variable based on grip strength, gait speed, serum albumin, and activities of daily living. We tested the interaction of frailty markers by treatment (TAVR versus SAVR) in proportional hazards regression models (survival) and piecewise linear regression models (KCCQ), adjusting for patient demographic and clinical factors.
Among the 3025 patients in the analytic cohort (2003 TAVR, 1022 SAVR; mean age 79.3 years, 61.6% men), 799 (26.4%) were nonfrail, 2041 (67.5%) were prefrail (1-2 frailty markers), and 185 (6.1%) were frail (3-4 frailty markers). Increasing frailty (none versus prefrail versus frail) was associated with higher 2-year mortality (5.5% versus 11.1% versus 22.8%; log-rank <0.001) and worse 2-year health status among survivors (KCCQ scores adjusted for baseline: 84.8 versus 79.6 versus 77.4, <0.001). In multivariable models, there were no significant interactions between frailty markers and treatment group for either survival (interaction =0.39) or health status (interaction >0.47 for all time points).
In a cohort of older patients with severe aortic stenosis who were at low or intermediate surgical risk, increasing frailty markers were associated with worse 2-year mortality and greater health status impairment after either TAVR or SAVR, but there were no significant interactions between type of valve replacement and frailty with respect to either outcome.
随机试验表明,对于手术中低危或中危的患者,经导管主动脉瓣置换术(TAVR)与外科主动脉瓣置换术(SAVR)相比,在短期和中期均具有优势。衰弱和衰弱前期可能会解释部分优势,因为这会导致患者无法从重大手术中完全恢复。
我们研究了 2 年的结果(生存率和堪萨斯城心肌病问卷 [KCCQ]评分),纳入了在 PARTNER(经股动脉主动脉瓣置换术)2A 试验、SAPIEN 3 中危登记研究和 PARTNER 3 试验中接受经股 TAVR 或 SAVR 治疗的中危或低危手术患者。衰弱情况根据握力、步态速度、血清白蛋白和日常生活活动能力作为连续变量进行评估。我们通过治疗(TAVR 与 SAVR)在比例风险回归模型(生存率)和分段线性回归模型(KCCQ)中检验衰弱标志物的交互作用,调整患者的人口统计学和临床因素。
在分析队列中的 3025 例患者中(2003 例 TAVR,1022 例 SAVR;平均年龄 79.3 岁,61.6%为男性),799 例(26.4%)无衰弱,2041 例(67.5%)为衰弱前期(有 1-2 个衰弱标志物),185 例(6.1%)为衰弱(有 3-4 个衰弱标志物)。衰弱程度增加(无衰弱、衰弱前期、衰弱)与 2 年死亡率增加相关(5.5%、11.1%、22.8%;对数秩检验<0.001),并且幸存者的 2 年健康状况也恶化(KCCQ 评分调整基线后:84.8、79.6、77.4,均<0.001)。在多变量模型中,衰弱标志物与治疗组在生存率(交互作用=0.39)或健康状况(所有时间点的交互作用>0.47)方面均无显著交互作用。
在一组严重主动脉瓣狭窄且手术中低危或中危的老年患者中,衰弱标志物增加与 2 年死亡率增加以及 TAVR 或 SAVR 后健康状况恶化相关,但瓣膜置换类型与衰弱程度之间在这两个结果上无显著交互作用。