Transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in patients younger than 65 years: analysis from the national inpatient sample database

Abstract Background Data on the relative utilization and outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) versus surgical AVR (SAVR) in patients <65 years are limited. Purpose To compare the relative utilization and outcomes of TAVR versus SAVR in patients <65 years in the United States. Methods We queried the National Inpatient Sample (2016-2020) to identify patients <65 years hospitalized for isolated AVR. In-hospital outcomes of TAVR versus SAVR were compared using multivariable regression and propensity-matching analyses. Results Of 74,155 patients aged <65 years hospitalized for isolated AVR, 17,300 (23.3%) underwent isolated TAVR, and 56,855 (76.7%) underwent isolated SAVR. From 2016-2020, the use of TAVR increased, while the use of SAVR decreased in patients <65 years (both ptrend<0.01). Factors independently associated with TAVR selection in patients <65 years included female sex, congestive heart failure, pulmonary disease, renal failure, liver disease, cancer, and prior revascularization. Factors independently associated with SAVR selection included bicuspid aortic valve. After adjustment for baseline characteristics, TAVR was associated with lower odds of in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.61, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.38-0.97), stroke (aOR 0.58, 95% CI 0.38-0.90), acute kidney injury (aOR 0.41, 95% CI 0.34-0.49), and major bleeding (aOR 0.62, 95% CI 0.38-0.96), and higher vascular complications compared with SAVR (aOR 2.39, 95% CI 1.75-3.24). Length of stay was shorter and nonhome discharges were lower with TAVR (all p<0.01). Similar findings were observed in the propensity-matched cohort. Conclusions This nationwide observational analysis showed that TAVR is a feasible treatment option for patients <65 years with lower in-hospital mortality and resource utilization compared with SAVR.Central Illustration