Transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Abstract

Objectives

Although a number of studies compared mortality after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with that after surgical aortic replacement (SAVR) in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), no meta-analysis of them has been conducted to date. To determine whether TAVI or SAVR is associated with better postprocedural survival in patients with COPD, a meta-analysis of all studies currently available was performed. Design. To identify all comparative studies of TAVI with SAVR in patients with COPD, PubMed and Web of Science were searched through January 2020. Studies meeting the following criteria were included in the present meta-analysis: the design was an observational comparative study or a randomized controlled trial; the study population was patients with COPD; patients were assigned to TAVI versus SAVR; and outcomes included all-cause mortality. Adjusted (if unavailable, unadjusted) odds or hazard ratios with their confidence intervals (CIs) of mortality for TAVI versus SAVR were extracted from each study. Study-specific estimates were combined in the random-effects model. Results. Six eligible studies with a total of 4771 patients with COPD were identified and included in the present meta-analysis. The meta-analysis indicated significantly lower early (in-hospital or 30-day) mortality after TAVI than after SAVR (odds ratio, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.53–0.90; p = .006) but no significant difference in midterm (1-year to 5-year) mortality between TAVI and SAVR (hazard ratio, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.79–1.44; p = .68). Conclusions. In patients with COPD, TAVI was associated with reduced early mortality, while midterm mortality appeared similar, as compared with SAVR.

Keywords:

• Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
• meta-analysis
• mortality
• surgical aortic replacement
• transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Acknowledgements

No other person(s) made a substantial contribution to the current study.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).