Kotronias, R, Kwok, CS, George, S, Capodanno, D, Ludman, PF, Townend, JN, Doshi, SN, Khogali, S, Genereux, P, Herrmann, HC, Mamas, M and Bagur, R (2017) Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation With or Without Percutaneous Coronary Artery Revascularization Strategy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Journal of the American Heart Association: Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Disease, 6 (6). ISSN 2047-9980

[thumbnail of TAVI With vs Without Revasc-JAHA-2017-005960-R1 - Tracked Changes Final MM.pdf]
TAVI With vs Without Revasc-JAHA-2017-005960-R1 - Tracked Changes Final MM.pdf - Accepted Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial.

Download (378kB) | Preview
[thumbnail of e005960.full.pdf]
e005960.full.pdf - Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives.

Download (2MB) | Preview


Recent recommendations suggest that in patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation and coexistent significant coronary artery disease, the latter should be treated before the index procedure; however, the evidence basis for such an approach remains limited. We performed a systematic review and meta‐analysis to study the clinical outcomes of patients with coronary artery disease who did or did not undergo revascularization prior to transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

Methods and Results
We conducted a search of Medline and Embase to identify studies evaluating patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation with or without percutaneous coronary intervention. Random‐effects meta‐analyses with the inverse variance method were used to estimate the rate and risk of adverse outcomes. Nine studies involving 3858 participants were included in the meta‐analysis. Patients who underwent revascularization with percutaneous coronary intervention had a higher rate of major vascular complications (odd ratio [OR]: 1.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.33–2.60; P=0.0003) and higher 30‐day mortality (OR: 1.42; 95% CI, 1.08–1.87; P=0.01). There were no differences in effect estimates for 30‐day cardiovascular mortality (OR: 1.03; 95% CI, 0.35–2.99), myocardial infarction (OR: 0.86; 95% CI, 0.14–5.28), acute kidney injury (OR: 0.89; 95% CI, 0.42–1.88), stroke (OR: 1.07; 95% CI, 0.38–2.97), or 1‐year mortality (OR: 1.05; 95% CI, 0.71–1.56). The timing of percutaneous coronary intervention (same setting versus a priori) did not negatively influence outcomes.

Our analysis suggests that revascularization before transcatheter aortic valve implantation confers no clinical advantage with respect to several patient‐important clinical outcomes and may be associated with an increased risk of major vascular complications and 30‐day mortality. In the absence of definitive evidence, careful evaluation of patients on an individual basis is of paramount importance to identify patients who might benefit from elective revascularization.

Item Type: Article
Additional Information: This is the final published version of the article (version of record). It first appeared online via American Heart Association at https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.117.005960 - please refer to any applicable terms of use of the publisher.
Uncontrolled Keywords: coronary artery disease, percutaneous coronary intervention, transcatheter aortic valve implantation
Subjects: R Medicine > RC Internal medicine > RC666 Diseases of the circulatory (Cardiovascular) system
Divisions: Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences > Institute for Science and Technology in Medicine
Depositing User: Symplectic
Date Deposited: 03 May 2017 14:17
Last Modified: 19 Mar 2019 15:26
URI: https://eprints.keele.ac.uk/id/eprint/3341

Actions (login required)

View Item
View Item