P6314Outcomes with transcathether aortic valve implantation in patients with acute decompensated aortic stenosis

Patel, Kush; Chehab, Omar; Barakat, Mohamad Fahed; Jerrum, Melanie; Queenan, Helen; Bedford, Kerry; Broyd, Chris; Ozkor, Muhiddin; Kennon, Simon; Mathur, Anthony; Mullen, Michael

doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehy566.p6314

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous studies 15‐17 also demonstrated that urgent TAVI could be performed safely with similar acceptable outcomes to those in the elective group despite the increased risks in this age group.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 90%

“…These results were achieved despite patients undergoing urgent TAVI having more co-morbidities, such as impaired left ventricular systolic function, chronic kidney disease and poor mobility, all of which have been previously noted to be markers of adverse outcome. [12][13][14] Previous studies [15][16][17] also demonstrated that urgent TAVI could be performed safely with similar acceptable outcomes to those in the elective group despite the increased risks in this age group.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Elective versus urgent in‐hospital transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Kabahizi¹,

Sheikh

Williams³

et al. 2021

Cathet Cardio Intervent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is maturing as a treatment option and is now often undertaken during an unscheduled index hospital admission. The aim of this study was to look at procedural and mid‐term outcomes of patients undergoing elective versus urgent in‐hospital transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Methods We identified a total of 1,157 patients who underwent TAVI between November 2007 and November 2019 at the Sussex Cardiac Centre in the UK. We compared the demographics, procedural outcomes, 30‐day and 1‐year mortality between elective and urgent patients. Emergency and salvage TAVI cases were excluded. Results Of the 1,157 patients who underwent the procedure, 975 (84.3%) had elective while 182 (15.7%) had urgent TAVI. Predominant aortic stenosis was more frequent in elective patients (91.7% vs. 77.4%); p < .01), while predominant aortic regurgitation was seen more commonly in the urgent group (11.5% vs. 4.2%; p < .01). Implantation success was similar between the elective (99.1%) and urgent group (99.4%). In‐hospital (1.65% vs. 1.3%: p .11), 30 day (3.5% vs. 3.3%: p .81) and 1 year (10.9% vs. 11%; p .81) mortality rates were similar in the elective and urgent groups, respectively. Conclusions In contemporary practice, urgent TAVI undertaken on the index admission can be performed at similar risk to elective outpatient TAVI.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 90%