Relative Survival After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: How Do Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Fare Relative to the General Population?

• Published in: Journal of the American Heart Association 2017-10, Vol.6 (10), p.n/a
• Main Authors: Martin, Glen P., Sperrin, Matthew, Hulme, William, Ludman, Peter F., Belder, Mark A., Toff, William D., Alabas, Oras, Moat, Neil E., Doshi, Sagar N., Buchan, Iain, Deanfield, John E., Gale, Chris P., Mamas, Mamas A.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adult; Age Factors; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; aortic stenosis; Aortic Valve Stenosis - diagnosis; Aortic Valve Stenosis - mortality; Aortic Valve Stenosis - surgery; Case-Control Studies; Female; Humans; Kaplan-Meier Estimate; Male; Middle Aged; mortality; Original Research; Process Assessment, Health Care; Registries; relative survival; Risk Factors; Survival Rate; Time Factors; transcatheter aortic valve implantation; Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement - adverse effects; Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement - mortality; Treatment Outcome; United Kingdom - epidemiology
• ISSN: 2047-9980; 2047-9980
• DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.117.007229

Background Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is indicated for patients with aortic stenosis who are intermediate‐high surgical risk. Although all‐cause mortality rates after TAVI are established, survival attributable to the procedure is unclear because of competing causes of mortality. The aim was to report relative survival (RS) after TAVI, which accounts for background mortality risks in a matched general population. Methods and Results National cohort data (n=6420) from the 2007 to 2014 UK TAVI registry were matched by age, sex, and year to mortality rates for England and Wales (population, 57.9 million). The Ederer II method related observed patient survival to that expected from the matched general population. We modelled RS using a flexible parametric approach that modelled the log cumulative hazard using restricted cubic splines. RS of the TAVI cohort was 95.4%, 90.2%, and 83.8% at 30 days, 1 year, and 3 years, respectively. By 1‐year follow‐up, mortality hazards in the >85 years age group were not significantly different from those of the matched general population; by 3 years, survival rates were comparable. The flexible parametric RS model indicated that increasing age was associated with significantly lower excess hazards after the procedure; for example, by 2 years, a 5‐year increase in age was associated with 20% lower excess mortality over the general population. Conclusions RS after TAVI was high, and survival rates in those aged >85 years approximated those of a matched general population within 3 years. High rates of RS indicate that patients selected for TAVI tolerate the risks of the procedure well.