Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement with Minimal Contrast Dye in Patients with Renal Insufficiency

• Published in: Yonsei medical journal Vol. 62; no. 11; pp. 990 - 996
• Main Authors: Choi, Jah Yeon, Hong, Geu-Ru, Hong, Sung-Jin, Shim, Chi Young, Ahn, Chul-Min, Kim, Jung-Sun, Kim, Byeong-Keuk, Ko, Young-Guk, Choi, Donghoon, Jang, Yangsoo, Hong, Myeong-Ki
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Yonsei University College of Medicine 01.11.2021; 연세대학교의과대학
• Subjects: Original; 의학일반
• ISSN: 0513-5796; 1976-2437; 1976-2437
• DOI: 10.3349/ymj.2021.62.11.990

Concerns have been consistently raised in regards to the considerable amount of contrast dye used during transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in patients with renal insufficiency. In the present study, we introduced minimal contrast TAVR and compared its 30-day clinical outcomes with conventional TAVR.PURPOSEConcerns have been consistently raised in regards to the considerable amount of contrast dye used during transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in patients with renal insufficiency. In the present study, we introduced minimal contrast TAVR and compared its 30-day clinical outcomes with conventional TAVR.We retrospectively investigated 369 patients who underwent TAVR between July 2011 and April 2020 in our institute. Among them, 93 patients with severe aortic stenosis and renal insufficiency (estimated glomerular filtration rate ≤50 mL/min/1.73 m²) were included and divided into a conventional TAVR group (n=56) and a minimal contrast TAVR group (n=37). In the minimal contrast TAVR group, the total amount of contrast was <10 mL during the entire TAVR procedure. Thirty-day major adverse clinical events (MACE), including death, stroke, implantation of permanent pacemaker, and initiation of hemodialysis, were investigated.MATERIALS AND METHODSWe retrospectively investigated 369 patients who underwent TAVR between July 2011 and April 2020 in our institute. Among them, 93 patients with severe aortic stenosis and renal insufficiency (estimated glomerular filtration rate ≤50 mL/min/1.73 m²) were included and divided into a conventional TAVR group (n=56) and a minimal contrast TAVR group (n=37). In the minimal contrast TAVR group, the total amount of contrast was <10 mL during the entire TAVR procedure. Thirty-day major adverse clinical events (MACE), including death, stroke, implantation of permanent pacemaker, and initiation of hemodialysis, were investigated.The incidence of MACE was significantly lower in the minimal contrast TAVR group than the conventional TAVR group (16.2% vs. 42.9%, p=0.010). Death occurred in 9 patients (16.1%) in the conventional TAVR group and in 0 patients in the minimal contrast group (p=0.011). Hemodialysis was initiated in 2 patients (5.4%) in the minimal contrast TAVR group and in 7 patients (12.5%) in the conventional TAVR group (p=0.256). Multivariate regression analysis showed that the minimal contrast TAVR procedure was an independent predictor for reducing MACE (hazard ratio 0.208, 95% confidence interval: 0.080-0.541, p=0.001).RESULTSThe incidence of MACE was significantly lower in the minimal contrast TAVR group than the conventional TAVR group (16.2% vs. 42.9%, p=0.010). Death occurred in 9 patients (16.1%) in the conventional TAVR group and in 0 patients in the minimal contrast group (p=0.011). Hemodialysis was initiated in 2 patients (5.4%) in the minimal contrast TAVR group and in 7 patients (12.5%) in the conventional TAVR group (p=0.256). Multivariate regression analysis showed that the minimal contrast TAVR procedure was an independent predictor for reducing MACE (hazard ratio 0.208, 95% confidence interval: 0.080-0.541, p=0.001).Minimal contrast TAVR is feasible and shows more favorable short-term clinical outcomes than conventional TAVR in patients with renal insufficiency.CONCLUSIONMinimal contrast TAVR is feasible and shows more favorable short-term clinical outcomes than conventional TAVR in patients with renal insufficiency.