Outcomes and Predictors of Stroke After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in the Cerebral Protection Device Era

Background Studies have shown inconclusive results on the effectiveness of cerebral protection devices (CPDs) with transcatheter aortic valve replacement. We aimed to analyze the national statistics on stroke and other outcomes with CPD use. Methods and Results The Nationwide Readmissions Database (...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Shashank Shekhar, Toshiaki Isogai, Ankit Agrawal, Roop Kaw, Gauranga Mahalwar, Amar Krishnaswamy, Rishi Puri, Grant Reed, Amgad Mentias, Samir Kapadia
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2024-08-01
Series:Journal of the American Heart Association: Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Disease
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/JAHA.124.034298
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1850146656751714304
author Shashank Shekhar
Toshiaki Isogai
Ankit Agrawal
Roop Kaw
Gauranga Mahalwar
Amar Krishnaswamy
Rishi Puri
Grant Reed
Amgad Mentias
Samir Kapadia
author_facet Shashank Shekhar
Toshiaki Isogai
Ankit Agrawal
Roop Kaw
Gauranga Mahalwar
Amar Krishnaswamy
Rishi Puri
Grant Reed
Amgad Mentias
Samir Kapadia
author_sort Shashank Shekhar
collection DOAJ
description Background Studies have shown inconclusive results on the effectiveness of cerebral protection devices (CPDs) with transcatheter aortic valve replacement. We aimed to analyze the national statistics on stroke and other outcomes with CPD use. Methods and Results The Nationwide Readmissions Database (2017–2020) was queried to obtain data on patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Outcomes were compared between patients with a CPD and patients without a CPD. Of 271 804 patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement, CPD was used in 7.3% of patients. In a multivariable logistic regression analysis, CPD use was not associated with lower overall stroke rates (1.6% versus 1.9% without CPD; odds ratio, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.84–1.07]; P=0.364), but it was significantly associated with lower major stroke rates (1.2% versus 1.5% without CPD; odds ratio, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.74–0.98]; P=0.02). Patients with a CPD also had a shorter length of stay, higher routine discharges to home/self‐care (74.9% versus 70.6%), and lower mortality rates (0.7% versus 1.3%). The 30‐day (9.6% versus 11.7%) and 180‐day (24.6% versus 28.2%) readmission rates were significantly lower in the CPD cohort. Among patients who developed stroke, patients with a CPD had more frequent routine discharges. Prior valve surgery was associated with the highest risk of overall and major stroke. Conclusions CPD use during transcatheter aortic valve replacement was not independently associated with a lower risk of overall stroke but was associated with a lower risk of major stroke in a multivariable model. Data from future randomized trials that may offset any potential confounders in our study are required to help identify patients who would benefit from the use of these devices.
format Article
id doaj-art-23c6b285f60b4ee7bdfcb84e8de5b7a4
institution OA Journals
issn 2047-9980
language English
publishDate 2024-08-01
publisher Wiley
record_format Article
series Journal of the American Heart Association: Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Disease
spelling doaj-art-23c6b285f60b4ee7bdfcb84e8de5b7a42025-08-20T02:27:46ZengWileyJournal of the American Heart Association: Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Disease2047-99802024-08-01131510.1161/JAHA.124.034298Outcomes and Predictors of Stroke After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in the Cerebral Protection Device EraShashank Shekhar0Toshiaki Isogai1Ankit Agrawal2Roop Kaw3Gauranga Mahalwar4Amar Krishnaswamy5Rishi Puri6Grant Reed7Amgad Mentias8Samir Kapadia9Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Heart Vascular and Thoracic Institute, Cleveland Clinic Cleveland OH USADepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, Heart Vascular and Thoracic Institute, Cleveland Clinic Cleveland OH USADepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, Heart Vascular and Thoracic Institute, Cleveland Clinic Cleveland OH USADepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, Heart Vascular and Thoracic Institute, Cleveland Clinic Cleveland OH USADepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, Heart Vascular and Thoracic Institute, Cleveland Clinic Cleveland OH USADepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, Heart Vascular and Thoracic Institute, Cleveland Clinic Cleveland OH USADepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, Heart Vascular and Thoracic Institute, Cleveland Clinic Cleveland OH USADepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, Heart Vascular and Thoracic Institute, Cleveland Clinic Cleveland OH USADepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, Heart Vascular and Thoracic Institute, Cleveland Clinic Cleveland OH USADepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, Heart Vascular and Thoracic Institute, Cleveland Clinic Cleveland OH USABackground Studies have shown inconclusive results on the effectiveness of cerebral protection devices (CPDs) with transcatheter aortic valve replacement. We aimed to analyze the national statistics on stroke and other outcomes with CPD use. Methods and Results The Nationwide Readmissions Database (2017–2020) was queried to obtain data on patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Outcomes were compared between patients with a CPD and patients without a CPD. Of 271 804 patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement, CPD was used in 7.3% of patients. In a multivariable logistic regression analysis, CPD use was not associated with lower overall stroke rates (1.6% versus 1.9% without CPD; odds ratio, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.84–1.07]; P=0.364), but it was significantly associated with lower major stroke rates (1.2% versus 1.5% without CPD; odds ratio, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.74–0.98]; P=0.02). Patients with a CPD also had a shorter length of stay, higher routine discharges to home/self‐care (74.9% versus 70.6%), and lower mortality rates (0.7% versus 1.3%). The 30‐day (9.6% versus 11.7%) and 180‐day (24.6% versus 28.2%) readmission rates were significantly lower in the CPD cohort. Among patients who developed stroke, patients with a CPD had more frequent routine discharges. Prior valve surgery was associated with the highest risk of overall and major stroke. Conclusions CPD use during transcatheter aortic valve replacement was not independently associated with a lower risk of overall stroke but was associated with a lower risk of major stroke in a multivariable model. Data from future randomized trials that may offset any potential confounders in our study are required to help identify patients who would benefit from the use of these devices.https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/JAHA.124.034298cerebral embolic protectionsentinel devicestrokeTAVR
spellingShingle Shashank Shekhar
Toshiaki Isogai
Ankit Agrawal
Roop Kaw
Gauranga Mahalwar
Amar Krishnaswamy
Rishi Puri
Grant Reed
Amgad Mentias
Samir Kapadia
Outcomes and Predictors of Stroke After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in the Cerebral Protection Device Era
Journal of the American Heart Association: Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Disease
cerebral embolic protection
sentinel device
stroke
TAVR
title Outcomes and Predictors of Stroke After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in the Cerebral Protection Device Era
title_full Outcomes and Predictors of Stroke After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in the Cerebral Protection Device Era
title_fullStr Outcomes and Predictors of Stroke After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in the Cerebral Protection Device Era
title_full_unstemmed Outcomes and Predictors of Stroke After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in the Cerebral Protection Device Era
title_short Outcomes and Predictors of Stroke After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in the Cerebral Protection Device Era
title_sort outcomes and predictors of stroke after transcatheter aortic valve replacement in the cerebral protection device era
topic cerebral embolic protection
sentinel device
stroke
TAVR
url https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/JAHA.124.034298
work_keys_str_mv AT shashankshekhar outcomesandpredictorsofstrokeaftertranscatheteraorticvalvereplacementinthecerebralprotectiondeviceera
AT toshiakiisogai outcomesandpredictorsofstrokeaftertranscatheteraorticvalvereplacementinthecerebralprotectiondeviceera
AT ankitagrawal outcomesandpredictorsofstrokeaftertranscatheteraorticvalvereplacementinthecerebralprotectiondeviceera
AT roopkaw outcomesandpredictorsofstrokeaftertranscatheteraorticvalvereplacementinthecerebralprotectiondeviceera
AT gaurangamahalwar outcomesandpredictorsofstrokeaftertranscatheteraorticvalvereplacementinthecerebralprotectiondeviceera
AT amarkrishnaswamy outcomesandpredictorsofstrokeaftertranscatheteraorticvalvereplacementinthecerebralprotectiondeviceera
AT rishipuri outcomesandpredictorsofstrokeaftertranscatheteraorticvalvereplacementinthecerebralprotectiondeviceera
AT grantreed outcomesandpredictorsofstrokeaftertranscatheteraorticvalvereplacementinthecerebralprotectiondeviceera
AT amgadmentias outcomesandpredictorsofstrokeaftertranscatheteraorticvalvereplacementinthecerebralprotectiondeviceera
AT samirkapadia outcomesandpredictorsofstrokeaftertranscatheteraorticvalvereplacementinthecerebralprotectiondeviceera