Percutaneous versus surgical approach to aortic valve replacement with coronary revascularization: A systematic review andmeta‐analysis

Objective The optimal treatment of patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) and complex coronary artery disease (CAD) remains controversial. We conducted a meta-analysis to investigate outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) versus surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Methods We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases from its inception up to 17 December 2022 for studies that assessed TAVR + PCI versus SAVR + CABG in patients with AS and CAD. The primary outcome was perioperative mortality. Results Six observational studies including 135,003 patients assessing TAVI + PCI ( n = 6988) versus SAVR + CABG ( n = 128,015) were included. Compared to SAVR + CABG, TAVR + PCI was not significantly associated with perioperative mortality (RR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.48–1.21; p = 0.25), vascular complications (RR, 1.85; 95% CI, 0.72–4.71; p = 0.20), acute kidney injury (RR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.73–1.33; p = 0.95), myocardial infraction (RR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.30–1.77; p = 0.49), or stroke (RR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.74–1.02; p = 0.09). TAVR + PCI significantly reduced the incidence of major bleeding (RR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.24–0.36; p < 0.01) and length of hospital stay (MD, −1.60; 95% CI, −2.45 to −0.76; p < 0.01), but increased the incidence of pacemaker implantation (RR, 2.03; 95% CI, 1.88–2.19; p < 0.01). At follow-up, TAVR + PCI was significantly associated with coronary reintervention (RR, 3.17; 95% CI, 1.03–9.71; p = 0.04) and a reduced rate of long-term survival (RR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.79–0.94; p < 0.01) Conclusions In patients with AS and CAD, TAVR + PCI did not increase perioperative mortality, but increased the rates of coronary reintervention and long-term mortality.