Background: Anecdotal evidence suggests that transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is being used beyond pre-market label indications.
Methods: To assess the frequency and outcomes associated with “off-label” use of TAVI, we conducted a retrospective study, examining adherence to patient selection criteria in 63 patients undergoing implantation with the 18F CoreValve ReValving System (CRS). Label status (on-label vs off-label) was determined by following (1) inclusion/exclusion criteria indicated in the 18F CRS safety and efficacy trial and (2) a patient selection matrix indicating anatomical boundaries to guide patient selection. Off-label use was defined as the presence of at least one exclusion criterion or “non-acceptable” criteria based on the patient selection matrix.
Results: Off-label implantation was identified in 42 patients (67%)—40% had one, 19% had two and 8% had three or more off-label criteria. Baseline demographics were similar between the groups except for a higher logistic EuroSCORE in the on-label group (19.8 (11.2) vs 14.5 (7.3), p = 0.029). There was no significant difference in the procedural success rates between the on-label and off-label groups (91% vs 95%, respectively, p = 0.47). The frequency of angiographic moderate-severe aortic regurgitation, post-implant dilatation or implantation of a second valve was also similar between the groups. At 30 days, the cumulative death rate was 10%; there were four deaths in the “on-label” and three deaths in the “off-label” group.
Conclusion: In this study we found that “off-label” implantation of the CRS was common. Further studies are needed to evaluate the consequences of “label status” for patients undergoing TAVI.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and Peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.