Objective To determine the extent to which differences in generic quality of life （QOL） between transcatheter aortic valve implanta- tion （TAVI） and surgical aortic valve replacement （AVR） patients explained by ...Objective To determine the extent to which differences in generic quality of life （QOL） between transcatheter aortic valve implanta- tion （TAVI） and surgical aortic valve replacement （AVR） patients explained by EuroSCORE and heart-team operability assessment. Methods A total of 146 high-risk patients with EuroSCORE 〉 6 and aged 〉 75 years underwent TAVI （n = 80） or aortic valve replacement （n = 66） between February 2010 and July 2013. A total of 75 patients also completed preoperative and six month SF-12 QOL measures. Analyses examined incident major morbidity, compared six month QOL between groups adjusted for EUroSCORE and operability, and quantified rates of clinically significant QOL improvement and deterioration. Results The AVR group required longer ventilation （〉 24 h） （TAVI 5.0% vs. AVR 20.6%, P = 0.004） and more units of red blood cells [TAVI 0 （0-1） vs. AVR 2 （0-3）, P = 0.01]. New renal failure was higher in TAVI （TAVI 5.0% vs. AVR 0%, P = 0.06）. TAVI patients reported significantly lower vitality （P = 0.01） by comparison to AVR patients, however these findings were no longer significant after adjustment for operability. In both procedures, clinically significant QOL improvement was common [range 25.0% （general health） - 62.9% （physical role）] whereas deterioration in QOL occurred less frequently [range 9.3% （physical role） - 33.3% （mental health）]. Conclusions Clinically significant improvement and deterioration in QOL was evident at six months in high risk elderly aortic valve replacement patients. Overall QOL did not differ between TAVI and AVR once operability was taken into consideration.展开更多
文摘Objective To determine the extent to which differences in generic quality of life （QOL） between transcatheter aortic valve implanta- tion （TAVI） and surgical aortic valve replacement （AVR） patients explained by EuroSCORE and heart-team operability assessment. Methods A total of 146 high-risk patients with EuroSCORE 〉 6 and aged 〉 75 years underwent TAVI （n = 80） or aortic valve replacement （n = 66） between February 2010 and July 2013. A total of 75 patients also completed preoperative and six month SF-12 QOL measures. Analyses examined incident major morbidity, compared six month QOL between groups adjusted for EUroSCORE and operability, and quantified rates of clinically significant QOL improvement and deterioration. Results The AVR group required longer ventilation （〉 24 h） （TAVI 5.0% vs. AVR 20.6%, P = 0.004） and more units of red blood cells [TAVI 0 （0-1） vs. AVR 2 （0-3）, P = 0.01]. New renal failure was higher in TAVI （TAVI 5.0% vs. AVR 0%, P = 0.06）. TAVI patients reported significantly lower vitality （P = 0.01） by comparison to AVR patients, however these findings were no longer significant after adjustment for operability. In both procedures, clinically significant QOL improvement was common [range 25.0% （general health） - 62.9% （physical role）] whereas deterioration in QOL occurred less frequently [range 9.3% （physical role） - 33.3% （mental health）]. Conclusions Clinically significant improvement and deterioration in QOL was evident at six months in high risk elderly aortic valve replacement patients. Overall QOL did not differ between TAVI and AVR once operability was taken into consideration.
