Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

The Role of Comorbidities in Predicting Functional Improvement After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation.

BACKGROUND: Patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) have a high comorbidity burden. We sought to stratify patients into functional outcomes using the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ-12), a patient-reported outcome with benefits over both the New York Heart Association (NYHA) classification and the original 23-item KCCQ, and to evaluate the importance of comorbidities in predicting failure of functional improvement post-TAVI in a contemporary cohort.

METHODS: In total, 366 patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing TAVI with baseline KCCQ-12 were retrospectively analysed and divided into two groups. Failure to improve was defined as a score <60 and a change in score <10 at 1 year in either overall score (KCCQ-OS) or clinical summary score (KCCQ-CSS).

RESULTS: Failure to improve was noted in 13% of patients, who were more likely to have lower KCCQ-OS at baseline (47 [35-59] vs 56 [42-74]), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (19% vs 8%), severe chronic kidney disease (CKD) (13% vs 2%), a clinical frailty score (CFS) ≥5 (41% vs 14%), and lower serum albumin (36 g/L [34-38] vs 38 g/L [35-40]). On multivariate analysis, with an area under the curve of 0.71 (0.63-0.78), baseline KCCQ-OS (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.3 [0.1-0.6], p=0.04), COPD (aOR 2.8 [1.2-6.5], p=0.02), and severe CKD (aOR 5.7 [1.7-18.5], p=0.004) remained independent predictors. CFS alone had a similar predictive value as the multivariable model (OR 2.0 [1.3-3.4], area under the curve 0.69 [0.59-0.80], p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS: KCCQ scores were effective in delineating functional outcomes, with most patients in our relatively lower surgical risk cohort showing significant functional improvements post-TAVI. Low baseline KCCQ, moderate or worse COPD, and severe CKD were associated with failure of improvement post-TAVI. Baseline CFS appears to be a good screening tool to predict poor improvement. These factors should be evaluated and weighted accordingly in pre-TAVI assessments and decision-making.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app