TAVR in Intermediate-Risk Patients: A Review of the PARTNER 2 Trial and its Future Implications

Sameer Arora, Cassandra J. Ramm, Jacob A Misenheimer, John P. Vavalle

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Following publication of the results of the PARTNER trial, the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association recognized the success of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) by incorporating it as a feasible option in high-surgical risk patients, and recommending it as the standard of care for patients at prohibitive risk of surgery. Although this was recognized as a major success in the field of percutaneous valve replacement, surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) continued to be realized as the procedure of choice for low and intermediate surgical risk patients. Meanwhile, observational studies - predominantly from Europe - showed encouraging results for TAVR in lower-risk populations. With a lack of any large randomized controlled clinical trial, however, the advantages of TAVR continued to be limited to only a minority of patients with severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis.

METHODS: Between December 2011 and November 2013, the PARTNER 2 investigators enrolled a total of 2,032 intermediate-risk patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis at 57 centers in the United States and Canada. Patients were randomized 1:1 to undergo either TAVR or SAVR. The primary end point was death and neurological events after two years.

RESULTS: The study results showed similar rates for death and neurological events in the TAVR and SAVR groups. The TAVR group was found to have a larger valve area and a lower incidence of acute kidney injury, bleeding events, and atrial fibrillation. Conversely, the SAVR group experienced fewer vascular complications and lower rates of paravalvular regurgitation.

CONCLUSIONS: The results of the PARTNER 2 trial are reviewed, and its implications for the future discussed.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)653-656
Number of pages4
JournalThe Journal of heart valve disease
Volume25
Issue number6
StatePublished - Nov 1 2016

Fingerprint

Aortic Valve
Surgical Instruments
Aortic Valve Stenosis
Standard of Care
Acute Kidney Injury
Atrial Fibrillation
Canada
Observational Studies
Blood Vessels
Publications
Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement
Randomized Controlled Trials
Research Personnel
Hemorrhage
Mortality
Incidence
Population

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Arora, S., Ramm, C. J., Misenheimer, J. A., & Vavalle, J. P. (2016). TAVR in Intermediate-Risk Patients: A Review of the PARTNER 2 Trial and its Future Implications. The Journal of heart valve disease, 25(6), 653-656.

TAVR in Intermediate-Risk Patients : A Review of the PARTNER 2 Trial and its Future Implications. / Arora, Sameer; Ramm, Cassandra J.; Misenheimer, Jacob A; Vavalle, John P.

In: The Journal of heart valve disease, Vol. 25, No. 6, 01.11.2016, p. 653-656.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Arora, S, Ramm, CJ, Misenheimer, JA & Vavalle, JP 2016, 'TAVR in Intermediate-Risk Patients: A Review of the PARTNER 2 Trial and its Future Implications', The Journal of heart valve disease, vol. 25, no. 6, pp. 653-656.
Arora, Sameer ; Ramm, Cassandra J. ; Misenheimer, Jacob A ; Vavalle, John P. / TAVR in Intermediate-Risk Patients : A Review of the PARTNER 2 Trial and its Future Implications. In: The Journal of heart valve disease. 2016 ; Vol. 25, No. 6. pp. 653-656.
@article{d8f67c6bd9644ecc9e089c0e96c24ddc,
title = "TAVR in Intermediate-Risk Patients: A Review of the PARTNER 2 Trial and its Future Implications",
abstract = "BACKGROUND: Following publication of the results of the PARTNER trial, the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association recognized the success of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) by incorporating it as a feasible option in high-surgical risk patients, and recommending it as the standard of care for patients at prohibitive risk of surgery. Although this was recognized as a major success in the field of percutaneous valve replacement, surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) continued to be realized as the procedure of choice for low and intermediate surgical risk patients. Meanwhile, observational studies - predominantly from Europe - showed encouraging results for TAVR in lower-risk populations. With a lack of any large randomized controlled clinical trial, however, the advantages of TAVR continued to be limited to only a minority of patients with severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis.METHODS: Between December 2011 and November 2013, the PARTNER 2 investigators enrolled a total of 2,032 intermediate-risk patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis at 57 centers in the United States and Canada. Patients were randomized 1:1 to undergo either TAVR or SAVR. The primary end point was death and neurological events after two years.RESULTS: The study results showed similar rates for death and neurological events in the TAVR and SAVR groups. The TAVR group was found to have a larger valve area and a lower incidence of acute kidney injury, bleeding events, and atrial fibrillation. Conversely, the SAVR group experienced fewer vascular complications and lower rates of paravalvular regurgitation.CONCLUSIONS: The results of the PARTNER 2 trial are reviewed, and its implications for the future discussed.",
author = "Sameer Arora and Ramm, {Cassandra J.} and Misenheimer, {Jacob A} and Vavalle, {John P.}",
year = "2016",
month = "11",
day = "1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "25",
pages = "653--656",
journal = "Journal of Heart Valve Disease",
issn = "0966-8519",
publisher = "ICR Publishers Ltd",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - TAVR in Intermediate-Risk Patients

T2 - A Review of the PARTNER 2 Trial and its Future Implications

AU - Arora, Sameer

AU - Ramm, Cassandra J.

AU - Misenheimer, Jacob A

AU - Vavalle, John P.

PY - 2016/11/1

Y1 - 2016/11/1

N2 - BACKGROUND: Following publication of the results of the PARTNER trial, the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association recognized the success of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) by incorporating it as a feasible option in high-surgical risk patients, and recommending it as the standard of care for patients at prohibitive risk of surgery. Although this was recognized as a major success in the field of percutaneous valve replacement, surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) continued to be realized as the procedure of choice for low and intermediate surgical risk patients. Meanwhile, observational studies - predominantly from Europe - showed encouraging results for TAVR in lower-risk populations. With a lack of any large randomized controlled clinical trial, however, the advantages of TAVR continued to be limited to only a minority of patients with severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis.METHODS: Between December 2011 and November 2013, the PARTNER 2 investigators enrolled a total of 2,032 intermediate-risk patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis at 57 centers in the United States and Canada. Patients were randomized 1:1 to undergo either TAVR or SAVR. The primary end point was death and neurological events after two years.RESULTS: The study results showed similar rates for death and neurological events in the TAVR and SAVR groups. The TAVR group was found to have a larger valve area and a lower incidence of acute kidney injury, bleeding events, and atrial fibrillation. Conversely, the SAVR group experienced fewer vascular complications and lower rates of paravalvular regurgitation.CONCLUSIONS: The results of the PARTNER 2 trial are reviewed, and its implications for the future discussed.

AB - BACKGROUND: Following publication of the results of the PARTNER trial, the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association recognized the success of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) by incorporating it as a feasible option in high-surgical risk patients, and recommending it as the standard of care for patients at prohibitive risk of surgery. Although this was recognized as a major success in the field of percutaneous valve replacement, surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) continued to be realized as the procedure of choice for low and intermediate surgical risk patients. Meanwhile, observational studies - predominantly from Europe - showed encouraging results for TAVR in lower-risk populations. With a lack of any large randomized controlled clinical trial, however, the advantages of TAVR continued to be limited to only a minority of patients with severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis.METHODS: Between December 2011 and November 2013, the PARTNER 2 investigators enrolled a total of 2,032 intermediate-risk patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis at 57 centers in the United States and Canada. Patients were randomized 1:1 to undergo either TAVR or SAVR. The primary end point was death and neurological events after two years.RESULTS: The study results showed similar rates for death and neurological events in the TAVR and SAVR groups. The TAVR group was found to have a larger valve area and a lower incidence of acute kidney injury, bleeding events, and atrial fibrillation. Conversely, the SAVR group experienced fewer vascular complications and lower rates of paravalvular regurgitation.CONCLUSIONS: The results of the PARTNER 2 trial are reviewed, and its implications for the future discussed.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85046265002&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85046265002&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 28290162

AN - SCOPUS:85046265002

VL - 25

SP - 653

EP - 656

JO - Journal of Heart Valve Disease

JF - Journal of Heart Valve Disease

SN - 0966-8519

IS - 6

ER -