Aller au contenu principal
Accès ouvert déclaré 2020 article

Comparison of Early Surgical or Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Versus Conservative Management in Low‐Flow, Low‐Gradient Aortic Stenosis Using Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting: Results From the TOPAS Prospective Observational Cohort Study

46Citations signalées, ce qui n’est pas une note de qualité
9Institutions déclarées
5Pays d’affiliation déclarés

Rattachement africain : ca, at, de, us, br. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.

Le résumé fourni par la source

Background No randomized comparison of early (ie, ≤3 months) aortic valve replacement (AVR) versus conservative management or of transcatheter AVR (TAVR) versus surgical AVR has been conducted in patients with low‐flow, low‐gradient (LFLG) aortic stenosis (AS). Methods and Results A total of 481 consecutive patients (75±10 years; 71% men) with LFLG AS (aortic valve area ≤0.6 cm 2 /m 2 and mean gradient <40 mm Hg), 72% with classic LFLG and 28% with paradoxical LFLG, were prospectively recruited in the multicenter TOPAS (True or Pseudo Severe Aortic Stenosis) study. True‐severe AS or pseudo‐severe AS was adjudicated by flow‐independent criteria. During follow‐up (median [IQR] 36 [11–60] months), 220 patients died. Using inverse probability of treatment weighting to address the bias of nonrandom treatment assignment, early AVR (n=272) was associated with a major overall survival benefit (hazard ratio [HR], 0.34 [95% CI, 0.24–0.50]; P <0.001). This benefit was observed in patients with true‐severe AS but also with pseudo‐severe AS (HR, 0.38 [95% CI, 0.18–0.81]; P =0.01), and in classic (HR, 0.33 [95% CI, 0.22–0.49]; P <0.001) and paradoxical LFLG AS (HR, 0.42 [95% CI, 0.20–0.92]; P =0.03). Compared with conservative management in the conventional multivariate model, trans femoral TAVR was associated with the best survival (HR, 0.23 [95% CI, 0.12–0.43]; P <0.001), followed by surgical AVR (HR, 0.36 [95% CI, 0.23–0.56]; P <0.001) and alternative‐access TAVR (HR, 0.51 [95% CI, 0.31–0.82]; P =0.007). In the inverse probability of treatment weighting model, trans femoral TAVR appeared to be superior to surgical AVR (HR [95% CI] 0.28 [0.11–0.72]; P =0.008) with regard to survival. Conclusions In this large prospective observational study of LFLG AS, early AVR appeared to confer a major survival benefit in both classic and paradoxical LFLG AS. This benefit seems to extend to the subgroup with pseudo‐severe AS. Our findings suggest that TAVR using femoral access might be the best strategy in these patients. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT01835028.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.

Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert

DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.

Titre Crossref
Comparison of Early Surgical or Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Versus Conservative Management in Low‐Flow, Low‐Gradient Aortic Stenosis Using Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting: Results From the TOPAS Prospective Observational Cohort Study
Date Crossref
15/12/2020
Éditeur
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Type
journal-article

Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.

Les institutions déclarées

Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.

Les sujets associés

Cardiac Valve Diseases and TreatmentsInfective Endocarditis Diagnosis and ManagementCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics

BNTIC News n’est pas le producteur de ces données. Les publications sont interrogées à la demande dans Crossref, OpenAIRE, DOAJ, Europe PMC, HAL, DataCite, AfricArXiv, ROR et la Banque mondiale, sans clé d’accès. OpenAlex reste optionnel. Aucun service payant n’est nécessaire et aucune donnée externe n’est enregistrée en base. Consulter les sources et leurs limites.