Clinical End Points of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Compared With Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients <65 Years of Age (From the National Inpatient Sample Database)

It is unknown if transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a safe alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients <65 years old. Data from the National Inpatient Sample database were utilized. Patients from 2011 to 2015, ages 18 to 64 years old (inclusive) who underwent TAVI and SAVR were included. Patients who underwent SAVR and who also received a concomitant nonaortic valve surgery were excluded. A propensity score analysis was used. A total of 18,970 (528 TAVI and 18,442 SAVR) patients were identified. Patients who underwent TAVI were older (57 ± 7 vs 54 ± 10 years old, p <0.001) with more frequent co-morbidities. Overall in-hospital mortality was similar between TAVI and SAVR (odds ratio [OR] = 0.52, p = 0.12). Postprocedure stroke (OR = 0.50, p = 0.24), acute kidney injury (OR = 0.98, p = 0.89), acute myocardial infarction (OR = 0.48, p = 0.08), and vascular complication requiring surgery (OR = 0.20, p = 0.11) were similar between patients who underwent TAVI and SAVR. Bleeding requiring transfusion (OR = 0.32, p <0.01) was less frequent in patients who underwent TAVI, but new pacemakers (OR = 1.7, p = 0.02) were more frequent in these patients. Patients who underwent TAVI had shorter hospital stays (7.9 vs 10.0 days, p <0.001) and were more likely to be discharged to home. Cost between TAVI and SAVR was similar ($49,014 vs $42,907, respectively, p = 0.82). In the <65 years old patient population, TAVI also conferred similar overall in-hospital mortality compared with patients who underwent SAVR. TAVI resulted in fewer major complications, shorter hospital stay, and more frequent discharge to home, but higher rates of pacemaker implantation compared with SAVR. Therefore, TAVI appears to be a safe alternative to SAVR in patients <65 years old.