Late outcomes of early discharge following transcatheter aortic valve implantation: results from the POLESTAR trial

Le résumé fourni par la source

Abstract Background Early discharge (ED) within 48 h after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) seems feasible and safe. The POLESTAR study demonstrated good 30-day outcomes of ED after TAVI using the ACURATE valve but also identified patients requiring prolonged hospitalization. Long-term outcomes after ED or prolonged hospitalization remain unknown. Aims To determine the long-term impact of successful ED and prolonged hospitalization. Methods POLESTAR was a prospective, multicentre, observational trial enrolling patients deemed eligible for ED prior to transfemoral TAVI with ACURATE Neo/Neo2. One-year outcomes were determined and compared between those who achieved ED and those who did not. The primary endpoint was a landmark analysis of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), including all-cause mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction, and cardiac rehospitalization, occurring between 30 days and oneyear post-procedure. Results Among 252 patients from 15 sites in four countries, ED was achieved in 173 (69%) patients, while 79 (31%) required prolonged hospital stay (non-ED). One-year survival was 97%. Landmark 30-day analysis showed MACE occurring in 4.7% of ED patients vs 11.7% of non-ED patients at 1 year (HR 0.38[0.15–0.98] P = .045). Rehospitalization was numerically lower in the ED group (HR 0.56[0.27–1.19]; P = .13). Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) scores improved significantly in the full cohort (18.5 improvement; 95%CI: 15.9–21.0, P < .01), with no statistically significant difference between ED and non-ED cohorts (P for interaction = .30). Conclusions An ED strategy after TAVI with ACURATE Neo was safe in selected patients without compromising longer-term outcomes or health-related quality of life. Patients who did not achieve ED experienced more MACE after 30 days (NCT03910751).

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