Background: Several mortality prediction models (MPM) are used for predicting early (30-day) mortality following transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Little is known about their predictive performance in external TAVI populations. We aim to externally validate established MPMs on a large TAVI dataset from the Netherlands Heart Registration (NHR). Methods: We included data from NHR-patients who underwent TAVI during 2013-2017. We calculated the predicted mortalities per MPM. We assessed the predictive performance by discrimination (Area Under Receiver Operating-characteristic Curve, AU-ROC); the Area Under Precision-Recall Curve, AU-PRC; calibration (using calibration-intercept and calibration-slope); Brier Score and Brier Skill Score. We also assessed the predictive performance among subgroups: tertiles of mortality-risk for non-survivors, gender, and access-route. Results: We included 6177 TAVI-patients with an observed early-mortality rate of 4.5% (n = 280). We applied seven MPMs (STS, EuroSCORE-I, EuroSCORE-II, ACC-TAVI, FRANCE-2, OBSERVANT, and German-AV) on our cohort. The highest AU-ROCs were 0.64 (95%CI 0.61-0.67) for ACC-TAVI and 0.63 (95%CI 0.60-0.67) for FRANCE-2. All MPMs had a very low AU-PRC of ≤0.09. ACC-TAVI had the best calibration-intercept and calibration-

The TAo TAVI approach is feasible and offers a safe alternative for patients in whom a transfemoral approach is not feasible or desirable.

OBJECTIVES Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (MIMVS) has been performed increasingly for the past 2 decades; however, large comparative studies on short- and long-term outcomes have been lacking. This study aims to compare short- and long-term outcomes of patients undergoing MIMVS versus median sternotomy (MST) based on real-world data, extracted from the Netherlands Heart Registration. METHODS Patients undergoing mitral valve surgery, with or without tricuspid valve, atrial septal closure and/or rhythm surgery between 2013 and 2018 were included. Primary outcomes were short-term morbidity and mortality and long-term survival. Propensity score matching analyses were performed. RESULTS In total, 2501 patients were included, 1776 were operated through MST and 725 using an MIMVS approach. After propensity matching, no significant differences in baseline characteristics persisted. There were no between-group differences in 30-day mortality (1.1% vs 0.7%, P = 0.58), 1-year mortality (2.6% vs 2.1%, P = 0.60) or perioperative stroke rate (1.1% vs 0.6%, P = 0.25) between MST and MIMVS, respectively. An increased rate of postoperative arrhythmia was observed in the MST group (31.3% vs 22.4%, P < 0.001). A higher repair rate was found in the MST group (80.9% vs 76.3%, P = 0.04). No difference in 5-year survival was found between the matched groups (95.0% vs 94.3%, P = 0.49). Freedom from mitral reintervention was 97.9% for MST and 96.8% in the MIMVS group (P = 0.01), without a difference in reintervention-free survival (P = 0.30). CONCLUSIONS The MIMVS approach is as safe as the sternotomy approach for the surgical treatment of mitral valve disease. However, it comes at a cost of a reduced repair rate and more reinterventions in the long term, in the real-world.

In this meta-analysis of observational studies, transaortic TAVI appears to be a safe procedure with low complication rates.

No abstract