Antithrombotic Therapy in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Yaling Han
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehac290
IF: 39.3
2022-01-01
European Heart Journal
Abstract:Editor-in-Chief, reviews two of the most remarkable papers published in The Chinese Journal of Cardiology (CJC). Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has become an established and increasingly used approach for the management of severe symptomatic aortic stenosis (AS) or regurgitation throughout the surgical risk spectrum, showing similar, or even superior outcomes compared with standard surgical aortic valve replacement. Despite an iteration in TAVR device technologies and improved patient selection and management through the multidisciplinary heart teams, challenges, and controversies exist regarding the balancing of ischaemic and bleeding risks in these patients and the optimal antithrombotic regimens to adopt after TAVR are still unclear. This was recently reported in the CJC with a contribution entitled ‘One-year follow-up results of atrial fibrillation (AF) patients who undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation’ by Prof. Yaling Han and colleagues from General Hospital of Northern Theater Command. This is a single-centre retrospective study. A total of 115 patients with severe AS who were admitted to the hospital from May 2016 to November 2020 and successfully received TAVR were included. According to the absence or presence of AF pre-TAVR, they were divided into the AF group (n= 21) and the non-AF group (n= 94). The patients were followed up for postoperative antithrombotic treatment and the occurrence of the net adverse clinical and cerebrovascular events (NACCEs) at 12 months post-TAVR, including cardiac death, readmission to hospital for heart failure, non-fatal myocardial infarction, ischaemic stroke, and major bleeding [Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) levels 3–5]. Among the 115 selected patients, age was (73.8+ 6.9) years, there were 63 males. In terms of postoperative antithrombotic therapy, 48.9% (46/94) of the patients in the non-AF group received monotherapy and 47.9% (45/94) received dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). In the AF group, 47.6% (10/21) received anticoagulants and 33.3% (7/21) received DAPT. The proportion of patients in the AF group taking non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) was higher than that in the non-AF group [38.1% (8/21) vs. 2.1% (2/94), P, 0.001]. During the 12 months follow-up, the incidence of NACCE after TAVR was 14.3% (3/21) in the AF group, which was numerically higher than that in the non-AF group [6.4% (6/94)], while the difference was not statistically significant (P= 0.441, Table 1). The incidence of major bleeding was significantly higher in the AF group than in the non-AF group [9.5% (2/21) vs. 0.0%, P= 0.032, Table 1]. Univariate logistic regression analysis showed that hypertension was associated with the risk of NACCE (OR= 8.308, P= 0.050), while AF was not associated with the risk of NACCE (P= 0.235). Therefore, the incidence of severe bleeding after TAVR is higher in
What problem does this paper attempt to address?