Estimating the adoption of transcatheter aortic valve replacement by US interventional cardiologists and clinical trialists

Joshua M. Stolker, Akshar Y. Patel, Michael J. Lim, Paul Hauptman

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background Despite extensive attention dedicated to transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in both the medical literature and lay press, little is known about the anticipated utilization of TAVR by the US cardiology community. Hypothesis TAVR use is likely to outstrip its initial clinical indications. Methods Four days after approval of the first TAVR device in November 2011 by the US Food and Drug Administration, we emailed an online questionnaire to 201 authors of major TAVR clinical trials (trialists) and 461 recent members of an interventional cardiology professional society (clinicians). Responses were compared using χ2, t tests, and analysis of variance. Results Of 205 surveys received (response rate 31%; 114 clinicians, 91 trialists), the majority of respondents were interventionalists (86%) working in academic practices (72%). Although most physicians anticipated referring <25% of their patients with severe aortic stenosis for TAVR, 68% believed that TAVR is equally efficacious as open-heart surgery, and 11% believed that moderate-surgical risk patients should also be considered for TAVR. More clinicians (98%) than trialists (81%) expected to routinely refer patients for TAVR (P < 0.001). Furthermore, the clinicians were anticipating less operator training and lower annual volume requirements for performing TAVR, when compared with the trialists (P ≤ 0.001). Conclusions Our findings suggest optimism for TAVR acceptance in the United States., with more conservative expectations regarding training, procedural volume requirements, and anticipated referral patterns among TAVR trialists than clinical interventionalists.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)691-697
Number of pages7
JournalClinical Cardiology
Volume36
Issue number11
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 1 2013
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Cardiology
Cardiologists
Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement
Aortic Valve Stenosis
United States Food and Drug Administration
Thoracic Surgery
Analysis of Variance
Referral and Consultation
Physicians
Equipment and Supplies
Surveys and Questionnaires
Optimism

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

Estimating the adoption of transcatheter aortic valve replacement by US interventional cardiologists and clinical trialists. / Stolker, Joshua M.; Patel, Akshar Y.; Lim, Michael J.; Hauptman, Paul.

In: Clinical Cardiology, Vol. 36, No. 11, 01.11.2013, p. 691-697.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{88ccd4e8e1654ba9813918d80d767e7e,
title = "Estimating the adoption of transcatheter aortic valve replacement by US interventional cardiologists and clinical trialists",
abstract = "Background Despite extensive attention dedicated to transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in both the medical literature and lay press, little is known about the anticipated utilization of TAVR by the US cardiology community. Hypothesis TAVR use is likely to outstrip its initial clinical indications. Methods Four days after approval of the first TAVR device in November 2011 by the US Food and Drug Administration, we emailed an online questionnaire to 201 authors of major TAVR clinical trials (trialists) and 461 recent members of an interventional cardiology professional society (clinicians). Responses were compared using χ2, t tests, and analysis of variance. Results Of 205 surveys received (response rate 31{\%}; 114 clinicians, 91 trialists), the majority of respondents were interventionalists (86{\%}) working in academic practices (72{\%}). Although most physicians anticipated referring <25{\%} of their patients with severe aortic stenosis for TAVR, 68{\%} believed that TAVR is equally efficacious as open-heart surgery, and 11{\%} believed that moderate-surgical risk patients should also be considered for TAVR. More clinicians (98{\%}) than trialists (81{\%}) expected to routinely refer patients for TAVR (P < 0.001). Furthermore, the clinicians were anticipating less operator training and lower annual volume requirements for performing TAVR, when compared with the trialists (P ≤ 0.001). Conclusions Our findings suggest optimism for TAVR acceptance in the United States., with more conservative expectations regarding training, procedural volume requirements, and anticipated referral patterns among TAVR trialists than clinical interventionalists.",
author = "Stolker, {Joshua M.} and Patel, {Akshar Y.} and Lim, {Michael J.} and Paul Hauptman",
year = "2013",
month = "11",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1002/clc.22202",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "36",
pages = "691--697",
journal = "Clinical Cardiology",
issn = "0160-9289",
publisher = "John Wiley and Sons Inc.",
number = "11",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Estimating the adoption of transcatheter aortic valve replacement by US interventional cardiologists and clinical trialists

AU - Stolker, Joshua M.

AU - Patel, Akshar Y.

AU - Lim, Michael J.

AU - Hauptman, Paul

PY - 2013/11/1

Y1 - 2013/11/1

N2 - Background Despite extensive attention dedicated to transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in both the medical literature and lay press, little is known about the anticipated utilization of TAVR by the US cardiology community. Hypothesis TAVR use is likely to outstrip its initial clinical indications. Methods Four days after approval of the first TAVR device in November 2011 by the US Food and Drug Administration, we emailed an online questionnaire to 201 authors of major TAVR clinical trials (trialists) and 461 recent members of an interventional cardiology professional society (clinicians). Responses were compared using χ2, t tests, and analysis of variance. Results Of 205 surveys received (response rate 31%; 114 clinicians, 91 trialists), the majority of respondents were interventionalists (86%) working in academic practices (72%). Although most physicians anticipated referring <25% of their patients with severe aortic stenosis for TAVR, 68% believed that TAVR is equally efficacious as open-heart surgery, and 11% believed that moderate-surgical risk patients should also be considered for TAVR. More clinicians (98%) than trialists (81%) expected to routinely refer patients for TAVR (P < 0.001). Furthermore, the clinicians were anticipating less operator training and lower annual volume requirements for performing TAVR, when compared with the trialists (P ≤ 0.001). Conclusions Our findings suggest optimism for TAVR acceptance in the United States., with more conservative expectations regarding training, procedural volume requirements, and anticipated referral patterns among TAVR trialists than clinical interventionalists.

AB - Background Despite extensive attention dedicated to transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in both the medical literature and lay press, little is known about the anticipated utilization of TAVR by the US cardiology community. Hypothesis TAVR use is likely to outstrip its initial clinical indications. Methods Four days after approval of the first TAVR device in November 2011 by the US Food and Drug Administration, we emailed an online questionnaire to 201 authors of major TAVR clinical trials (trialists) and 461 recent members of an interventional cardiology professional society (clinicians). Responses were compared using χ2, t tests, and analysis of variance. Results Of 205 surveys received (response rate 31%; 114 clinicians, 91 trialists), the majority of respondents were interventionalists (86%) working in academic practices (72%). Although most physicians anticipated referring <25% of their patients with severe aortic stenosis for TAVR, 68% believed that TAVR is equally efficacious as open-heart surgery, and 11% believed that moderate-surgical risk patients should also be considered for TAVR. More clinicians (98%) than trialists (81%) expected to routinely refer patients for TAVR (P < 0.001). Furthermore, the clinicians were anticipating less operator training and lower annual volume requirements for performing TAVR, when compared with the trialists (P ≤ 0.001). Conclusions Our findings suggest optimism for TAVR acceptance in the United States., with more conservative expectations regarding training, procedural volume requirements, and anticipated referral patterns among TAVR trialists than clinical interventionalists.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84887992933&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84887992933&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/clc.22202

DO - 10.1002/clc.22202

M3 - Article

C2 - 24038119

AN - SCOPUS:84887992933

VL - 36

SP - 691

EP - 697

JO - Clinical Cardiology

JF - Clinical Cardiology

SN - 0160-9289

IS - 11

ER -