Comparison of Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Younger Low Surgical Risk Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis

Summary

Participation Requirements

Description

BACKGROUND: Acquired aortic valve stenosis (AS) is the most common heart valve disease in the Western World with a prevalence of 2-7% at the age of >65 years. If untreated, it may lead to heart failure and death. Surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) until recent years has been the definitive tre...

BACKGROUND: Acquired aortic valve stenosis (AS) is the most common heart valve disease in the Western World with a prevalence of 2-7% at the age of >65 years. If untreated, it may lead to heart failure and death. Surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) until recent years has been the definitive treatment for patients with severe symptomatic AS. A less invasive transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has been developed and has been a treatment of choice mostly for elderly high risk or inoperable patients. As TAVR technology is continuously evolving and improving, it may be anticipated that it will become a valuable alternative - and even the preferred choice of treatment - for younger, low-risk patients with severe aortic valve stenosis in the near future. However, to date, there is no clinical evidence that supports this hypothesis. AIM: The purpose of the study is to compare TAVR and SAVR with regard to the intra- and post-procedural morbidity and mortality rate, hospitalization length, functional capacity, quality of life, and valvular prosthesis function in younger, low risk patients with severe AS, scheduled for aortic valve replacement. POPULATION: Younger low risk patients with severe aortic valve stenosis, which are scheduled for aortic valve replacement using a bioprosthesis. Subjects fulfilling the inclusion criteria, not having any exclusion criteria, and consenting to the trial will be randomized 1:1 to TAVR or SAVR with 496 patients in each group. DESIGN: The study is a randomized clinical multicenter trial. Central randomization with variable block size and stratification by gender and coronary comorbidity will be used. An independent event committee blinded to treatment allocation will adjudicate safety endpoints. Interim analysis is planned after the first 20 events included in the primary end-point (all-cause mortality, stroke or myocardial infarction). INTERVENTIONS: TAVR: Any CE-Mark approved transcatheter aortic bioprosthesis may be used in the study, and the choice is at the discretion of the local TAVR team. The transfemoral TAVR procedure may be performed under general anaesthesia, local anaesthesia/conscious sedation, or local anesthesia. Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) can be performed up to 30 days prior to TAVR or as a hybrid procedure. SAVR: The surgical SAVR technique follows standard protocol of the local department of cardio-thoracic surgery. The operation is performed under general anesthesia, which follows standard protocol of the department of anesthesiology. A commercial available surgical aortic bioprosthesis at the surgeons discretion will be implanted. Concomitant coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery may be performed. END POINTS: The primary endpoint is the composite rate of all-cause mortality death, myocardial infarction and stroke within one year after the procedure (VARC-2 defintions). Secondary endpoints are listed below. Follow-up will be performed after 30 days, 3 months, 1 year and yearly thereafter for a minimum of 5 years.

Tracking Information