Sutureless replacement versus transcatheter valve implantation in aortic valve stenosis: A propensity-matched analysis of 2 strategies in high-risk patients

ObjectiveThis propensity-matched study compared clinical and echocardiographic outcomes between patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and sutureless aortic valve replacement.MethodsFrom January 2010 to March 2012, 122 patients (age 79.4 ± 5.3 years, logistic euroSCORE 12% ± 8.4%) underwent minimally invasive sutureless aortic valve replacement, and 122 (age 84.6 ± 6.2 years, logistic euroSCORE 20.9% ± 2.5%) underwent TAVI. After propensity matching, 37 matched pairs were available for analysis.ResultsPreoperative characteristics and risk scores of matched groups were comparable. In-hospital mortalities were 0% in the sutureless group and 8.1% (n = 3) in the TAVI group (P = .24). Permanent pacemaker implantation was required in 4 patients in the sutureless group and 1 patient in the TAVI group (10.8% vs 2.7%; P = .18). A neurologic event was recorded in 2 patients of each group. Predischarge echocardiographic data showed higher paravalvular leak rate in the TAVI group (13.5% vs 0%; P = .027). At mean follow-up of 18.9 ± 10.1 months, overall cumulative survival was 91.9% and significantly differed between groups (sutureless 97.3% vs TAVI 86.5%; P = .015). In the TAVI group, a significant difference in mortality was observed between patients with (n = 20) and without (n = 17) paravalvular leak (25% vs 0%; P = .036).ConclusionsCombining the advantage of standard diseased valve removal with shorter procedural times, minimally invasive sutureless aortic valve replacement may be the first-line treatment for high-risk patients considered in the “gray zone” between TAVI and conventional surgery.