Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Aortic stenosis (AS) is a heart valve disease characterized by left ventricular outflow fixed obstruction. It can be managed by surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) or transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). However, real-world evidence for TAVI or SAVR outcomes is lacking in Taiwan. This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of TAVI and SAVR for treating of AS in Taiwan. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The National Health Insurance Research Database is a nationally representative cohort that contains detailed registry and claims data from all 23 million residents of Taiwan. This retrospective cohort study used this database to compare patients who underwent SAVR (bioprosthetic valves) or TAVI from 2017 to 2019. Survival outcomes and length of hospital stay (LOS) and intensive care unit (ICU) stay between TAVI and SAVR in the matched cohort. A Cox proportional hazards model was performed to identify the effect of treatment type on survival rates while controlling variables including age, gender, and comorbidities. RESULTS: We identified 475 and 1605 patients who underwent TAVI and SAVR with a bioprosthetic valve, respectively. Patients who underwent TAVI were older (82.19 vs. 68.75 y/o) and more likely to be female (55.79% vs. 42.31%) compared with patients who underwent SAVR. Propensity score matching (PSM) on age, gender, and Elixhauser Comorbidity Index (ECI) score revealed that 375 patients who underwent TAVI were matched with patients who underwent SAVR. A significant difference was found in survival rates between TAVI and SAVR. The 1-year mortality rate was 11.44% with TAVI and 17.55% with SAVR. Both the mean total LOS (19.86 vs. 28.24 days) and mean ICU stay (6.47 vs. 11.12 days) for patients who underwent TAVI were shorter than those who underwent SAVR. CONCLUSION: Patients who had undergone TAVI had better survival outcomes and shorter LOS compared with patients who had undergone SAVR in Taiwan.