English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Aims The ESC 2021 valvular heart disease [VHD] guidelines introduced an important and debated age cut-off (75 years) to lead the choice between surgical and transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in non-high-risk patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate what impact an age cut-off has on clinical outcomes following TAVI in low-to-Intermediate Risk patients from a real word registry. Methods We performed the investigation in a large, contemporary, real-world, multicentre, international, retrospective registry of 3862 consecutive patients, comparing the rates of patient risk factors, procedural characteristics, complications, and outcomes in the populations with &amp;lt; or ≥ 75 years old. Results In our real-world cohort of 2977 patients with mean STS score of 3.6% (5.0–2.5), we found 301 (10.1%) patients with age &amp;lt;75 years and 2676 (89.9%) with ≥75 years. In the younger group compared with the older, we have a higher prevalence of male (44% vs. 35%, P=0.003), higher BMI (mean of 28.5 kg/m² vs. 26.7 kg/m², P = &amp;lt;0.001), diabetes (32% vs. 26%, P=0.027), insulin-dependent diabetes (12% vs. 7%, P=0.001), smoking (18% vs. 7%, P&amp;lt;0.001), COPD (26% vs. 16%, P&amp;lt;0.001). Moreover, younger patients presented less previous PM/ICD (6% vs. 11%, P=0.023), less atrial fibrillation (24% vs. 33%, P=0.033), less renal impairment (30% vs. 66%, P&amp;lt;0.001) and a lower mean STS score (2.6% vs. 3.7%, P&amp;lt;0.001). There was no difference in annular sizing, valvular and LVOT calcifications between the two groups. Older patients had a higher prevalence of porcelain aorta (2% for age&amp;lt;75 vs. 9%, P=0.001). Between the two groups no significant differences in procedural characteristics were observed, including rates of pre-dilatation (P=0.369), post-dilatation (P=0.159) and contrast volume (P=0.259). Procedural complications, in-hospital outcomes and 2-year Kaplan-Meier (KM) survival was equivalent between both groups (P=0.930). Finally, we assessed the best age cut-off related to 1-year mortality in our population, resulting in 86 years. Still, also in this scenario, the KM survival analysis did not show significant differences (P=0.120). Conclusions In our large real-world contemporary low-to-intermediate risk TAVI population, an age cut-off of 75 years was not associated with any difference in clinical outcomes and survival at 2-years follow-up. This data reinforces the concept that age alone is not a sufficient variable to be considered when choosing between TAVI or SAVR. The recent ESC 2021 VHD guidelines cut-off is justified only by the lack of evidence and valve durability strategy but not of a proper advantage age-related.

european heart journal supplements

595 Impact of age on outcomes in a large multicentre low-to-intermediate risk TAVI population: in and out the age cut-off from ESC 2021 valvular heart disease guidelines