Surgical vs Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients 65 Years of Age and Older

Approval of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) for all risk profiles has extended TAVR use in patients not otherwise examined in clinical trials. We sought to evaluate contemporary real-world outcomes of surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) vs TAVR in Medicare beneficiaries by risk strata.

Using the US Centers for Medicare Services database, all patients aged 65-85 years undergoing isolated first-time SAVR (n = 34,215) or TAVR (n = 124,897) were evaluated (2018-2022). Predicted patient risk accounting for comorbidities simulating The Society of Thoracic Surgeons predicted risk of surgical mortality, but including frailty, were stratified by low (<4%, n = 36,297 TAVR; n = 14,693 SAVR), intermediate (4%-8%, n = 44,026 TAVR; n = 9693 SAVR), or high (>8%, n = 44,574 TAVR; n = 9841 SAVR) risk. Doubly robust risk adjustment with inverse probability weighting and multilevel regression with competing-risk time-to-event analyses compared outcomes.

SAVR was associated with higher risk-adjusted in-hospital mortality, acute kidney injury, and bleeding but lower pacemaker rate compared with TAVR across all risk strata (all P < .05). Longitudinal 5-year analysis highlighted that, compared with TAVR, SAVR was associated with superior freedom from composite death, stroke, or valve reintervention in low- and intermediate-risk patients (hazard ratio [HR] 0.85, P = .044, and HR 0.86, P = .039, respectively) as well as lower overall readmission for stroke in low- (HR 0.72, P = .038) and intermediate- (HR 0.78, P = .042) risk patients.

In low- and intermediate-risk Medicare beneficiaries, SAVR was associated with higher in-hospital mortality but superior 5-year longitudinal freedom from death, stroke, or valve reintervention compared to TAVR. These data may further enhance heart team decision-making and patient counseling.