Print page Print page
Switch language
The Capital Region of Denmark - a part of Copenhagen University Hospital

Two-Year Outcomes in Patients With Severe Aortic Valve Stenosis Randomized to Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement: The All-Comers Nordic Aortic Valve Intervention Randomized Clinical Trial

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  1. Diagnostic Potential of Intracardiac Echocardiography in Patients with Suspected Prosthetic Valve Endocarditis

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  2. A More COMPLETE Picture of Revascularization in STEMI

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

View graph of relations

BACKGROUND: The Nordic Aortic Valve Intervention (NOTION) trial was the first to randomize all-comers with severe native aortic valve stenosis to either transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with the CoreValve self-expanding bioprosthesis or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR), including a lower-risk patient population than previous trials. This article reports 2-year clinical and echocardiographic outcomes from the NOTION trial.

METHODS AND RESULTS: Two-hundred eighty patients from 3 centers in Denmark and Sweden were randomized to either TAVR (n=145) or SAVR (n=135) with follow-up planned for 5 years. There was no difference in all-cause mortality at 2 years between TAVR and SAVR (8.0% versus 9.8%, respectively; P=0.54) or cardiovascular mortality (6.5% versus 9.1%; P=0.40). The composite outcome of all-cause mortality, stroke, or myocardial infarction was also similar (15.8% versus 18.8%, P=0.43). Forward-flow hemodynamics were improved following both procedures, with effective orifice area significantly more improved after TAVR than SAVR (effective orifice area, 1.7 versus 1.4 cm(2) at 3 months). Mean valve gradients were similar after TAVR and SAVR. When patients were categorized according to Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality (STS-PROM) (<4% versus ≥4%), there was no statistically significant difference for TAVR and SAVR groups in the composite outcome for low-risk (14.7%, 95% confidence interval, 8.3-21.2 versus 16.8%; 95% confidence interval, 9.7-23.8; P=0.58) or intermediate-risk patients (21.1% versus 27.1%; P=0.59).

CONCLUSIONS: Two-year results from the NOTION trial demonstrate the continuing safety and effectiveness of TAVR in lower-risk patients. Longer-term data are needed to verify the durability of this procedure in this patient population.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: Unique identifier: NCT01057173.

Original languageEnglish
JournalCirculation. Cardiovascular interventions
Issue number6
Pages (from-to)pii: e003665
Publication statusPublished - Jun 2016

    Research areas

  • Journal Article

ID: 49708075