Concomitant coronary artery disease and its management in patients referred to transcatheter aortic valve implantation: Insights from the POL‐TAVI Registry. Issue 1 (26th August 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Huczek, Zenon; Zbroński, Karol; Grodecki, Kajetan; Scisło, Piotr; Rymuza, Bartosz; Kochman, Janusz; Dąbrowski, Maciej; Witkowski, Adam; Wojakowski, Wojciech; Parma, Radosław; Ochała, Andrzej; Grygier, Marek; Olasińska‐Wiśniewska, Anna; Araszkiewicz, Aleksander; Jagielak, Dariusz; Ciećwierz, Dariusz; Puchta, Dominika; Paczwa, Katarzyna; Filipiak, Krzysztof J.; Wilimski, Radosław; Zembala, Marian; Opolski, Grzegorz
• Is Part Of: Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions. Volume 91:Issue 1(2018)
• Page Start: 115
• Page End: 123
• Publication Date: 2017-08-26
• Subjects: coronary artery disease -- transcatheter aortic valve implantation -- SYNTAX score; Heart -- Diseases -- Diagnosis -- Periodicals; Cardiac catheterization -- Periodicals; 616.1207572
• DOI: 10.1002/ccd.27251
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1522-1946

Abstract

Abstract: Background: Coronary artery disease (CAD) and degenerative aortic stenosis often coexist. However, the impact of CAD and its management on the prognosis after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) remains uncertain. We sought to evaluate the impact of obstructive CAD, SYNTAX score (Ss), and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) prior to TAVI on short‐term outcome. Methods: Overall, 896 patients who underwent TAVI after heart team decision was included. Pre‐procedural angiograms were analysed to calculate baseline Ss (bSs) and residual Ss (rSs). Baseline, procedural and follow‐up data up to 30 days was acquired from the national POL‐TAVI registry. Results: Patients with obstructive CAD at baseline ( n = 462, 52%) had higher mortality as compared with the remaining (8.7 vs. 5.1%, log‐rank P = 0.039). Also, after correction for confounding factors obstructive CAD was identified as independent predictor of mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 1.74, 95% confidence intervals [CIs] 1.03–2.94, P = 0.037). In obstructive CAD, neither bSs (AUC 0.47, CI 0.38–0.56, P = 0.47) nor rSs (AUC 0.47, CI 0.30–0.64, P = 0.72 for those undergoing PCI and AUC 0.48, CI 0.37–0.59, P = 0.75 for the remaining) was predictive of mortality. When revascularization status was considered, patients with PCI prior to TAVI had similar outcome as those without obstructive CAD at baseline (7.7 vs. 5.1%, log‐rank P = 0.23) with no negative impact on mortality (HR 1.13, CI 0.62–2.09, P = 0.69). Conclusions: In conclusion, obstructive CAD at baseline evaluation for TAVI has independent negative impact on short‐term prognosis. However, neither baseline nor residual Ss values have prognostic ability in patients undergoing TAVI. Revascularization prior to TAVI seems to improve survival to levels comparable with patients without obstructive CAD at baseline.