\documentclass[10pt]{article}

\usepackage{fullpage}
\usepackage{setspace}
\usepackage{parskip}
\usepackage{titlesec}
\usepackage[section]{placeins}
\usepackage{xcolor}
\usepackage{breakcites}
\usepackage{lineno}
\usepackage{hyphenat}





\PassOptionsToPackage{hyphens}{url}
\usepackage[colorlinks = true,
            linkcolor = blue,
            urlcolor  = blue,
            citecolor = blue,
            anchorcolor = blue]{hyperref}
\usepackage{etoolbox}
\makeatletter
\patchcmd\@combinedblfloats{\box\@outputbox}{\unvbox\@outputbox}{}{%
  \errmessage{\noexpand\@combinedblfloats could not be patched}%
}%
\makeatother


\usepackage{natbib}




\renewenvironment{abstract}
  {{\bfseries\noindent{\abstractname}\par\nobreak}\footnotesize}
  {\bigskip}

\titlespacing{\section}{0pt}{*3}{*1}
\titlespacing{\subsection}{0pt}{*2}{*0.5}
\titlespacing{\subsubsection}{0pt}{*1.5}{0pt}


\usepackage{authblk}


\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage[space]{grffile}
\usepackage{latexsym}
\usepackage{textcomp}
\usepackage{longtable}
\usepackage{tabulary}
\usepackage{booktabs,array,multirow}
\usepackage{amsfonts,amsmath,amssymb}
\providecommand\citet{\cite}
\providecommand\citep{\cite}
\providecommand\citealt{\cite}
% You can conditionalize code for latexml or normal latex using this.
\newif\iflatexml\latexmlfalse
\providecommand{\tightlist}{\setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}\setlength{\parskip}{0pt}}%

\AtBeginDocument{\DeclareGraphicsExtensions{.pdf,.PDF,.eps,.EPS,.png,.PNG,.tif,.TIF,.jpg,.JPG,.jpeg,.JPEG}}

\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
\usepackage[ngerman,english]{babel}



\usepackage{float}








\begin{document}

\title{PERFORMANCE OF THE HEART TEAM APPROACH IN DAILY CLINICAL PRACTICE IN
HIGH-RISK PATIENTS WITH AORTIC STENOSIS}



\author[1]{Gabriela Tirado-Conte}%
\author[1]{Carolina Espejo}%
\author[1]{Luis Nombela-Franco}%
\author[1]{Pilar Jiménez-Quevedo}%
\author[2]{Javier Cobiella}%
\author[1]{David Vivas}%
\author[1]{Alberto De Agustin}%
\author[1]{Angela McInerney}%
\author[1]{Eduardo Pozo}%
\author[1]{Pablo Salinas}%
\author[1]{Iván Núñez-Gil}%
\author[1]{Nieves Gonzalo}%
\author[1]{Enrique Villagrán}%
\author[1]{Alfonso de Hoyos}%
\author[1]{Hernán Mejía-Rentería}%
\author[1]{Fernando Macaya}%
\author[1]{Manuel Carnero-Alcázar}%
\author[1]{Isidre Vilacosta}%
\author[1]{Antonio Fernández-Ortiz}%
\author[1]{Javier Escaned}%
\author[1]{Luis Maroto}%
\author[1]{Carlos Macaya}%
\affil[1]{Hospital Clínico San Carlos}%
\affil[2]{Affiliation not available}%


\vspace{-1em}



  
  \date{May 21, 2024}


\begingroup
\let\center\flushleft
\let\endcenter\endflushleft
\maketitle
\endgroup





\selectlanguage{english}
\begin{abstract}
Objectives: The Heart Team (HT) approach plays a key role in selecting
the optimal treatment strategy for patients with aortic stenosis. Little
is known about the HT decision process and its impact on outcomes. The
aim of this study was to identify the factors associated with the HT
decision, and evaluate clinical outcomes according to the treatment
choice. Methods: The study included a total of 286 consecutive patients
with aortic stenosis referred for discussion in the weekly HT meeting in
a cardiovascular institute over 2 years. Patients were stratified
according to the selected therapeutic approach: medical treatment (MT),
surgical (SAVR) or transcatheter (TAVR) aortic valve replacement.
Baseline characteristics involved in making a therapeutic choice were
identified and a decision-making tree was built using CART methodology.
Results: Based on HT discussion 53 patients were assigned to SAVR, 210
to TAVR and 23 to MT. Older patients ([?]88-years-old) were mainly
assigned to TAVR or MT according to the Logistic EuroSCORE (\textless{}
or [?]28, respectively). While among younger patients (\textless{}88
years), significant mitral regurgitation ([?]grade III), frailty, STS
score and estimated glomerular filtration rate were the most relevant
factors influencing treatment allocation. One-year all-cause mortality
was 16.6\% in the invasive groups (TAVR 17.2\%, SAVR 14.0\%) and 68.7\%
in the MT arm. Conclusions: The HT decision was determined by
well-recognized risk factors which were used to define a treatment
decision algorithm. Future studies with younger and lower risk patients
may identify new contributory factors which may alter the selection
process and treatment choice.%
\end{abstract}%



\sloppy


\textbf{Introduction}

Aortic stenosis (AS) is the most common valvular heart disease referred
for valve replacement in developed countries. Since transcatheter aortic
valve replacement (TAVR) emerged as an alternative treatment to surgery
(SAVR) in moderate to high-risk patients with symptomatic severe AS, the
Heart Team (HT) has developed a key role in patient selection and choice
of therapeutic approach (1). In fact, decision making by a
multidisciplinary HT is the recommended strategy according to both the
European and American Guidelines (class I recommendation) (2,3).

The function of the HT should be to decipher complex clinical situations
and recommend the most appropriate treatment based on currently
available evidence and patient specific factors. A particularly complex
clinical scenario, yet one commonly encountered in every day clinical
practice, is the apparent lack of benefit in terms of post-procedural
functional improvement or survival in a subgroup of patients undergoing
TAVR (4). In this setting, the HT theoretically can identify those
patients in whom TAVR is likely to be futile. However, although
team-based patient-specific decision making is generally accepted, very
little information is available regarding the decision-making process,
determinant factors of HT decisions, and outcomes of patients with AS
discussed in the HT (5-7) . In order to improve patient selection and
outcome and for a better understanding of the optimal care model,
continuous evaluation of physician's decisions are required. Therefore,
the aims of this study were 1) to identify which factors influence the
HT decision regarding the optimal therapeutic approach for a specific
patient, and 2) evaluate patient's clinical outcomes according to the
assigned treatment.

\textbf{Methods}

The study prospectively evaluates consecutive patients with AS referred
to the HT meeting between June 2014 and February 2017 collated in a
dedicated database. Patients were referred from the catchment area of
our main hospital and from two other satellite hospitals with an
established alliance. Our study was approved by the Institutional Review
Board of our institution and all patients provided written informed
consent for the procedures. Heart team meetings were weekly scheduled in
the main hospital with the attendance of at least two cardiac surgeons,
two interventional cardiologists, one imaging cardiologist and one
clinical cardiologist. Physicians from other specialities, such as
internal medicine, oncology or geriatric medicine, were invited to
participate in the discussion when necessary and physicians from the
satellite hospitals participated fully via video-link. By closely
following previous Clinical Practice Guidelines (2,3), a local consensus
document (\textbf{Annex I in Supplementary data} ) was developed and
signed jointly by cardiac surgeons and cardiologists, with the aim of
identifying potential candidates with AS for HT discussion. This
document was distributed to all potential referral physicians within the
three hospitals. All patients with AS originally referred for TAVR and
those in whom the management was undecided were discussed by the HT and
were included in this analysis. However, patients directly referred to
SAVR who did not meet any of the criteria in the consensus document,
were excluded from this analysis unless the cardiac surgeon deemed it
necessary to discuss the case in the HT.

During the HT meeting, clinical data from each patient was summarized in
a formal presentation, which also included a prospective evaluation of
surgical risk using the logistic European System for Cardiac Operative
Risk Evaluation logistic EuroSCORE and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons
(STS) score. Each case presentation was followed by a discussion and
assessment of the overall risk profile. The HT then decided to refer the
patient to either medical treatment (MT), TAVR or SAVR. A prospective
clinical follow-up at 1- 6- 12- and 24-month was carried out through
clinical visits for all patients in the SAVR and TAVR groups, whereas
clinical outcomes were analysed retrospectively in the MT group. The
median follow-up time was 18 months {[}11-26{]} and only one patient was
lost to follow-up. In-hospital and long-term outcomes were defined
according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium 2 (VARC-2) criteria
(8).

Quantitative continuous variables are expressed as mean (standard
deviation) or median (interquartile range {[}IQR{]}) according to their
distribution. Assessment of normality was performed using the
Shapiro-Wilk test. Differences between treatment groups were evaluated
using the non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis rank test and Wilcoxon rank test
for continuous variables without normal distribution. Categorical
variables were summarized as number (percentage) and comparisons were
analysed by the chi-square or the Fisher\selectlanguage{ngerman}´s exact test. Patient baseline
characteristics were identified that significantly influenced decision
making within the HT. Considering these factors, a decision tree to
guide the decision-making process was built using CART (classification
and regression tree) methodology (9). The CART method is used for
constructing prediction models from data. The models are obtained by
dividing the data and adjusting a simple prediction model within each
partition. The programme determines cut-off points which best explain
the categorical endpoint of the analysis (MT or TAVR or SAVR) and
selects the predictor with the lowest p-value of a logistic regression
to make a first division. The result is a decision tree. We used the
registered baseline characteristics to reproduce the decision process by
using the non-parametric CART methodology. Survival curves were
calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and comparison was obtained
with the log-rank test. All analyses were performed using Stata 14
(StataCorp, College Station, TX, USA) and RStudio Team (2018). RStudio:
Integrated Development for R. RStudio, Inc., Boston, MA.

\textbf{Results}

A total of 286 consecutive patients with severe AS were included in the
study. There was a progressive growth in the number of patients referred
for HT discussion, with a 26\% increase seen between the first and third
time periods of the study. Of the 286 patients, 53 were referred for
surgical therapy, 210 for TAVR (188 to transfemoral and 22 to
non-transfemoral approach) and 23 were referred for MT (\textbf{Figure
1} ). Reasons for choosing MT are summarized in \textbf{Table 1.}

Baseline characteristics according to the initial selected therapeutic
strategy are shown in \textbf{Table 2} . Analysing data on an
intention-to-treat basis, patients referred for SAVR were younger (82
{[}78-84{]} year-old) than patients in the TAVR and MT group (85
{[}81-87{]} and 86 {[}83-90{]} year-old, respectively)
(p\textless{}0.001). There were no significant differences in gender nor
in cardiovascular risk factors. Patients in the SAVR group had lower
risk scores than those assigned to TAVR or MT. Median left ventricular
ejection fraction was lower in the MT group compared to TAVR and SAVR
groups (55\% {[}35-60{]} vs 60\% {[}52-66{]} and 60\% {[}51-64{]},
respectively). Significant mitral regurgitation (MR\selectlanguage{english}[?]grade III) was less
frequent in the TAVR group (5.5\%) compared to MT and SAVR groups
(42.1\% and 22.0\%, respectively, p\textless{}0.001 for both
comparison).

A total of 22 patients changed their therapy arm after being initially
discussed in HT session due to various reasons (supplementary Table S1).
Thus, considering the final definitive treatment, SAVR was performed in
50 patients, 195 patients underwent TAVR (176, 90.3\% through
transfemoral approach) and 41 patients received MT (\textbf{Figure 1} ).
Baseline characteristics according to definitive treatment group
(as-treated group) are shown in \textbf{Supplementary Table S2} .

Fifteen baseline clinical characteristics were included in the CART
analysis to determine relevant variables in the decision process
(\textbf{supplementary Table S3} ). Finally, the HT decision algorithm
was built with six of those variables {[}age, logistic EuroSCORE,
significant MR, frailty, STS score and estimated glomerular filtration
rate (eGFR){]} (\textbf{figure 2)} . Age was the first split point
identified with a cut-off value of 88 years old. Among patients 88-years
and older, logistic EuroSCORE was the determinant parameter which
assigned patients to TAVR or MT. Among patients\textless{}88 years old,
significant MR was the next split variable. In patients with significant
MR frailty was the conditioning variable to assign patients to SAVR or
TAVR. In those without MR, STS score and eGFR were recognized as further
relevant factors to decide between SAVR or TAVR.

Procedural characteristics and in-hospital outcomes among patients who
underwent TAVR or SAVR are depicted in \textbf{Tables 3 and 4} ,
respectively. Importantly, 20\% in the SAVR group underwent a
concomitant second valve intervention. In-hospital mortality in the TAVR
group was 4.6\% and 12.0\% in SAVR group. Specifically, in patients
undergoing isolated aortic valve intervention in-hospital mortality was
7.5\% with SAVR, compared with 3.4\% in the transfemoral TAVR cohort
(p=0.447). While major vascular complications were more frequent in the
TAVR group, acute kidney injury, significant bleeding, new onset atrial
fibrillation and longer hospital stay occurred more frequently in the
SAVR group. There were no differences between groups in terms of stroke
or the need for permanent pacemaker implantation.

A total of 89 deaths were recorded during follow-up, 45 (53.6\%) from a
cardiac cause. In the as-treated analysis, all-cause and cardiovascular
mortality at 1-year were 16.6\% and 7.2\% in the invasive groups (17.2\%
and 6.4\% in the TAVR group, 14.0\% and 10.2\% in SAVR group), and
68.7\% and 60.7\% in the MT arm, respectively \textbf{(figure
3).}Survival rate according to access site (transfemoral versus
non-transfemoral) and the type of surgery (single versus multiple valve
intervention) are depicted in \textbf{figure 4} . The survival analysis
according to the intention to treat are shown in \textbf{supplementary
figure S1 and S2} . All cause rehospitalization rate and NYHA class in
follow-up are shown in \textbf{supplementary figure S3} .

\textbf{Discussion}

The present study describes the HT treatment decision algorithm for a
defined cohort of consecutives patients with severe AS from a tertiary
referral hospital and two additional satellite hospitals. A local
consensus document was used to define the patients who needed to be
discussed in the HT. After HT discussion, more than 50\% of the patients
were allocated to the TAVR group, and approximately 20\% to each of the
other treatment groups. Baseline characteristics that determined the
allocation group were mainly older age, concomitant MR, surgical risk
scores, renal function and frailty. Patients without intervention had a
1-year mortality rate which was three times higher than either of the
intervention groups, mainly driven by cardiovascular death. Readmission
rates at 1-year was close to 50\% in both the TAVR and SAVR groups.

The HT concept stems from 2 randomized controlled trials comparing
surgical and percutaneous strategies in coronary artery disease and AS
(10,11). The purpose of the HT in these trials was to choose suitable
candidates for both interventions. The function of contemporary HT
discussions should be to apply the clinical acumen of the HT members to
the selection of patients for medical, transcatheter and surgical
treatment, as basing this decision purely on risk scoring systems may
not properly reflect specific high-risk characteristics in some patients
(12). As such, the HT approach provides a patient-specific decision
based on the overall patient profile.

The role of the HT has become more prominent in recent years since the
introduction of TAVR as an alternative treatment for severe AS,
particularly in elderly patients with multiple comorbidities. The
treatment of severe AS is a perpetually evolving area, with current
evidence attesting to its value in lower risk patients (13,14), making
continuous evaluation of HT decisions in this changing clinical
environment of paramount importance. In our center, the HT format was
designed by cardiac surgeons, and interventional, clinical and imaging
cardiologists who take part in weekly meetings. Referral physicians also
participated via video-link. The routine schedule of a weekly meeting
dedicated entirely to patients with AS, allowed all resources to be
focused on these patients to optimize the HT decision making process.
The number of candidates referred to the HT increased over the years,
suggesting a greater penetrance of the HT concept and, probably, greater
value being placed in HT decisions by the referring physicians.

A critical aspect of the HT is to determine which patients would not
benefit from an invasive approach and avoid futility (15). Reasons to
avoid an invasive treatment were heterogeneous, but in general invasive
treatment was avoided in patients considered to have a high-risk of
mortality. The most common reasons to avoid invasive treatment were
severe comorbidities or acute and critical illness. Despite careful
decision making to avoid futile invasive procedures, a relatively high
percentage of patients who underwent an invasive treatment died
(\textasciitilde{}15\%) or were readmitted (\textasciitilde{}40\%)
within one year, suggesting that the patient selection process could
still be improved. Specially, patients referred to the TAVR group were
very old and had several significant comorbidities, which conferred a
high risk of dying from non-cardiovascular causes (more than half of the
patients in this cohort). Continuous evaluation of the HT decisions,
with a special focus on these high-risk patients, should be implemented
to identify patients at higher risk of mortality and attempt to diminish
future futile interventions. In our cohort HT decisions could be
reconsidered if changes in the clinical situation arose and
approximately 10\% of the patients were subsequently changed from the
initial allocated group.

Several factors (older age, significant MR, frailty, eGFR and surgical
risk scores) defined by the CART analysis impacted the clinical decision
making in accordance to others (6). Significant MR was identified as an
important co-morbidity which increased the likelihood of referring the
patient for surgery, particularly in those without frailty. However, the
concomitant role of significant MR in patients with AS is still
unresolved (16). Previous reports showed a negative impact of untreated
baseline \selectlanguage{english}[?] grade III MR in both TAVR (17,18) and SAVR populations
(19,20). On the other hand, a double valve intervention is associated to
higher perioperative mortality than isolated SAVR (21). Among those with
significant MR, frailty was a determinant factor to choose TAVR over
SAVR. Frailty has been described as a strong predictor of
peri-procedural complications and mid-term outcomes after cardiac
surgery (22,23). However, in the setting of TAVR, frailty may not be
significantly related to peri-procedural mortality or morbidity;
although, it appears to have impact on mid-term outcomes (24). This may
be due to the less physiologically stressful nature of TAVR compared to
SAVR (25).

In our study, chronic kidney disease (CKD), a frequent comorbidity in
patients with AS(26), increased the chance of referring the patient for
TAVR over SAVR. A previous study in patients with CKD has shown better
short-term outcomes in TAVR compared to SAVR (27). Despite the
well-recognized limitation of surgical risk scores in predicting
outcomes in TAVR patients, systematic calculation of theses scores
provided useful and objective information for the HT discussion. Current
European and American guidelines support their use for surgical risk
stratification based on the inclusion criteria of randomized trials
(2,3,28). Moreover, surgical scores still provide a general risk
prediction in individualized patient and may predict a futile
intervention (29).

The purpose of the study was not to compare different therapeutic
options, due to the non-randomized nature of the interventions and the
selection bias by the HT. However, general results were in accordance
with previous registries and randomized trials with high-risk
patients(11,28). While acute kidney injury, new onset atrial
fibrillation and significant bleeding were higher in the SAVR group,
vascular complications were more frequent in TAVR patients. Stroke and
in-hospital mortality were similar. While residual aortic regurgitation
tended to be higher in TAVR patients, valve hemodynamics overall were
better in this group. Also, both invasive groups showed similar results
in terms of long-term mortality and rehospitalization rates.

This study has the inherent limitations of any observational study
without an external adjudication event committee. However, it
demonstrates the practical real-world issues related to the current
management of AS patients within a HT format. In this study we present
the results of a single HT with a limited sample size. Additionally, not
all patients with AS were evaluated by the HT. Although, wide-ranging
criteria were prospectively set to define those that should be referred
to the HT, a number of patients were treated without HT discussion and
were not included in our study. Patients in the MT arm were not
specifically followed-up and outcomes were identified in a retrospective
fashion. This study spans the time period before the publication of
trials on low risk patients, and the results cannot be extrapolated to
current practice relating to patients in lower risk groups.



\textbf{Figures Legends}

Figure 1. Flow chart of patients referred to the Heart team.

Figure 2. Decision tree by CART analysis.

X\textbar{}Y\textbar{}W denote the number of patients allocated to each
group: SAVR, TAVR and medical therapy, respectively. Ej.
``2\textbar{}6\textbar{}0'' indicate that 2 patients were assigned to
SAVR, 6 to TAVR, and 0 to medical therapy.

Figure 3. Survival curve for all-cause (A) and cardiovascular (B)
mortality according to treatment group.

Figure 4. Survival curve for all-cause (A) and cardiovascular (B)
mortality in the intervention group according to TAVR approach and
single versus multiple surgical valve intervention.

\emph{}

\textbf{Table 1. Reasons for medical treatment decision.}\selectlanguage{english}
\begin{longtable}[]{@{}lll@{}}
\toprule
\begin{minipage}[b]{0.32\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Reasons for medical treatment decision\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[b]{0.32\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Initial decision n (23)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[b]{0.32\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Final decision n (41)\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\midrule
\endhead
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.32\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Cardiac comorbidities: Severe left ventricular systolic dysfunction
and/or severe mitral regurgitation.\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.32\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
5\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.32\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
5\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.32\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Futility: Poor quality of life and/ or cognitive impairment.\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.32\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
4\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.32\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
4\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.32\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Acute illness.\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.32\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
4\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.32\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
7\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.32\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Advanced cancer.\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.32\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
3\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.32\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
4\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.32\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Patient /family refusal.\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.32\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
3\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.32\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
8\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.32\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Death while awaiting complementary tests or while awaiting
intervention.\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.32\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
2\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.32\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
9\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.32\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Prohibitive surgical risk, unsuitable peripheral vasculature for
TAVR.\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.32\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
1\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.32\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
1\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.32\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Asymptomatic patient.\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.32\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
1\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.32\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
3\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\bottomrule
\end{longtable}



\textbf{Table 2. Baseline characteristics in patients evaluated by the
Heart Team according to allocated treatment: TAVR, SAVR or MT.}\selectlanguage{english}
\begin{longtable}[]{@{}llllllll@{}}
\toprule
\begin{minipage}[b]{0.12\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[b]{0.12\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{MT} \textbf{(n=23)}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[b]{0.12\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{TAVR} \textbf{(n=210)}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[b]{0.12\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{SAVR} \textbf{(n=53)}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[b]{0.12\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{Global p value}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[b]{0.12\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{MT vs TAVR} \textbf{p value}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[b]{0.12\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{MT vs SAVR} \textbf{p value}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[b]{0.12\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{SAVR vs TAVR} \textbf{p value}\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\midrule
\endhead
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Age, years\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
86 {[}83-90{]}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
85 {[}81-87{]}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
82 {[}78-84{]}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{\textless{}0.001}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0.087\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{\textless{}0.001}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{\textless{}0.001}\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Female sex\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
14 (60.9\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
116 (55.2\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
32 (60.4\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0.727\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Body mass index,kg/m\textsuperscript{2}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
25.9 {[}24.1-30.0{]}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
27.0 {[}24.2-30.2{]}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
28.0 {[}25.4 -30.5{]}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0.321\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Diabetes mellitus\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
9 (40.9\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
76 (36.2\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
20 (37.7\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0.899\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Hypertension\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
20 (90.9\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
183 (87.1\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
46 (86.8\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0.871\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Coronary artery disease\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
14 (63.6\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
100 (47.6\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
21 (39.6\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0.164\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Prior myocardial infarction\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
3 (13.6\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
33 (15.7\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
11 (20.8\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0.630\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Prior CABG\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
2 (9.1\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
17 (8.1\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
4 (7.6\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0.933\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Prior valvular surgery\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
1 (4.6\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
13 (6.3\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
7 (13.5\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0.176\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Atrial fibrillation\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
12 (54.6\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
80 (38.1\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
21 (39.6\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0.339\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
3 (13.6\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
35 (16.7\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
7 (13.2\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0.886\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Previous stroke\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
4 (18.2\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
31 (14.8\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
6 (11.3\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0.675\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Peripheral vascular disease\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
1 (4.6\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
24 (11.4\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
3 (5.7\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0.448\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
NYHA class III and IV\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
20 (90.9\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
155 (73.8\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
32 (60.4\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0.020\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0.076\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{0.009}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0.054\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Creatinine, mg/dL\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
1.1 {[}0.9-1.4{]}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
1.0 {[}0.8-1.4{]}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
1.0 {[}0.8-1.2{]}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0.659\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Dialysis\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0 (0\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
2 (1.0\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
1 (1.9\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0.601\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
eGFR (ml/min)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
53.5 {[}43.1-66.6{]}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
62.8 {[}45.9-81.3{]}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
63.3 {[}49.9-81.9{]}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0.457\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Hemoglobin, g/dL\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
12.5 {[}10.8-13.6{]}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
12.0 {[}10.8-13.1{]}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
12.3 {[}10.7-13.4{]}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0.723\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Logistic EuroSCORE\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
18.4 {[}7.0-30.2{]}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
13.7 {[}8.4-20.6{]}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
10.0 {[}6.1-16.3{]}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{0.017}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0.327\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{0.032}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{0.009}\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Frailty\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
18 (78.3\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
104 (49.5\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
12 (22.6\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{\textless{}0.001}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{0.001}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{\textless{}0.001}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{\textless{}0.001}\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
STS score\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
5.6 {[}3.9-12.1{]}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
5.4 {[}3.8-9.3{]}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
3.8 {[}2.8-6.0{]}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{0.002}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0.713\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{0.038}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{\textless{}0.001}\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{Echocardiographic Variables}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{Echocardiographic Variables}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{Echocardiographic Variables}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{Echocardiographic Variables}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{Echocardiographic Variables}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{Echocardiographic Variables}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{Echocardiographic Variables}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{Echocardiographic Variables}\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Left ventricular ejection fraction, \%\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
55 {[}35-60{]}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
60 {[}52-66{]}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
60 {[}51-64{]}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{0.017}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{0.005}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{0.027}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0.477\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
LVEF \textless{} 37.5\%\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
5 (26.3\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
17 (8.1\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
6 (11.3\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{0.041}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{0.010}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0.464\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0.119\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Maximum aortic gradient, mmHg\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
62 {[}41.5-73{]}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
75 {[}62-90{]}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
77.6 {[}65-90{]}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0.061\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Mean aortic gradient, mmHg\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
36.0 {[}24.0-48.5{]}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
43.2 {[}38.0-56.0{]}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
45.0 {[}41.0-54.2{]}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0.073\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Aortic valve area, cm\textsuperscript{2}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0.8 {[}0.5-0.9{]}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0.6 {[}0.5-0.8{]}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0.7 {[}0.5-0.8{]}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0.101\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Grade III and IV Mitral regurgitation\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
8 (42.1\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
11 (5.5\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
11 (22.0\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{\textless{}0.001}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{\textless{}0.001}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0.095\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{\textless{}0.001}\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Pulmonary hypertension\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
6 (33.3\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
69 (33.2\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
13 (25.5\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0.566\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
PASP , mmHg\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
34 {[}20-50{]}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
20 {[}20-45{]}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
39 {[}20-54{]}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{0.046}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{0.032}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0.207\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.10\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0.166\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\bottomrule
\end{longtable}

Values are expressed as median {[}IQR{]} or n (\%). eGFR: estimated
glomerular filtration rate, MT: medical treatment, NYHA: New York Heart
Association, PASP: pulmonary artery systolic pressure, STS: Society of
Thoracic Surgeons

\textbf{Table 3. Procedural details according to treatment group: TAVR
or SAVR}\selectlanguage{english}
\begin{longtable}[]{@{}llll@{}}
\toprule
\begin{minipage}[b]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[b]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{TAVR} \textbf{(n=195)}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[b]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{SAVR} \textbf{(n=50)}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[b]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{p value}\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\midrule
\endhead
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Prosthesis type\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Prosthesis type\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Prosthesis type\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Prosthesis type\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
SAPIEN XT. Edwards\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
37 (19.0\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
N/A\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
SAPIEN 3. Edwards\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
94 (48.2\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
CoreValve. Medtronic\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
8 (4.1\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Evolut R. Medtronic\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
41 (21.0\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Portico. St Jude Medical\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
6 (3.1\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Symetis. Boston Scientific\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
6 (3.1\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Other THV\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
2 (1.0\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Trifecta St Jude Medical\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
18 (36.0\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Mitroflow. Sorin\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
11 (22.0\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Perimount Magna Ease. Carpentier-Edwards\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
9 (18.0\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Intuity. Edwards\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
7 (14.0\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Other surgical valves\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
5 (10.0\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Prosthesis size\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Prosthesis size\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Prosthesis size\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Prosthesis size\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
19-23 mm\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
71 (37.0\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
44 (88.0\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textless{}0.001\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
25-27 mm\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
74 (38.5\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
4 (5.1\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
29-31 mm\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
47 (24.5\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
2 (4.0\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Transfemoral approach\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
176 (90.3\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
N/A\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
N/A\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Surgical procedures\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Surgical procedures\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Surgical procedures\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Surgical procedures\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
SAVR +/- CABG\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
40 (80\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
SAVR + mitral valve surgery +/- CABG\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
3 (6\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
SAVR + tricuspid valve surgery +/- CABG\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
3 (6\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
SAVR + mitral and tricuspid valve surgery\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
2 (4\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
SAVR + other procedures\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
2 (4\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\bottomrule
\end{longtable}

Values are expressed as median {[}IQR{]} or n (\%). CABG: coronary
artery bypass grafting, SAVR: surgical aortic valve replacement, THV:
transcatheter heart valve.

\textbf{Table 4. In-hospital complications according to treatment group:
TAVR or SAVR}\selectlanguage{english}
\begin{longtable}[]{@{}llll@{}}
\toprule
\begin{minipage}[b]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[b]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{TAVR} \textbf{(n=195)}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[b]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{SAVR} \textbf{(n=50)}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[b]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{p value}\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\midrule
\endhead
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{Clinical endpoints}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{Clinical endpoints}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{Clinical endpoints}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textbf{Clinical endpoints}\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
In-hospital mortality\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
9 (4.6\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
6 (12.0\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0.053\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
In-hospital mortality (TF-TAVR versus isolated surgical aortic valve
intervention)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
6/176 (3.4\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
3/40 (7.5\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0.447\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Stroke\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
3 (1.6\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
2 (4.0\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0.272\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Major vascular complication\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
15 (7.9\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0 (0\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0.046\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Bleeding complications\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Bleeding complications\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Bleeding complications\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Bleeding complications\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Life-threatening\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
12 (6.2\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
6 (12.0\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0.161\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Major\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
13 (6.7\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
14 (28.0\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textless{}0.001\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Life-threatening or major\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
25 (12.9\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
20 (40.0\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textless{}0.001\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Acute kidney injury\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Acute kidney injury\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Acute kidney injury\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Acute kidney injury\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Stage 1\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
29 (15.0\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
15 (30.0\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0.014\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Stage 2 or 3\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
7 (3.6\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
9 (18.0\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textless{}0.001\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Any stage\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
36 (18.7\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
24 (48.0\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.24\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textless{}0.001\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
New permanent pacemaker implantation\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
27 (13.9\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
6 (12.0\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0.724\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
New onset atrial fibrillation\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
14 (7.3\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
15 (34.9\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textless{}0.001\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Length of ICU stay, days\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
1 {[}1-2{]}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
3 {[}1-7{]}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
\textless{}0.001\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Length of hospital stay, days\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
7 {[}5-10{]}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
9 {[}6-16{]}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0.005\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Echocardiographic endpoints\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Echocardiographic endpoints\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Echocardiographic endpoints\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Echocardiographic endpoints\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Aortic regurgitation [?]2\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
20 (10.9\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
1 (2.6\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0.137\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Aortic regurgitation [?]3\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
10 (5.5\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0 (0\%)\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0.217\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
Mean aortic gradient, mmHg\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
8.6 {[}6.1-12.0{]}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
12.0 {[}8.0-14.0{]}\strut
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[t]{0.22\columnwidth}\raggedright\strut
0.007\strut
\end{minipage}\tabularnewline
\bottomrule
\end{longtable}

Values are expressed as median {[}IQR{]} or n (\%). ICU: intensive care
unit,.TF-TAVR: transfemoral -- transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

\par\null

\textbf{References:}

\begin{enumerate}
\tightlist
\item
  Leon MB, Smith CR, Mack M et al; PARTNER Trial Investigators.
  Transcatheter aortic-valve implantation for aortic stenosis in
  patients who cannot undergo surgery. N Engl J Med. 2010;363:1597--607.
\item
  Joint Task Force on the Management of Valvular Heart Disease of the
  European Society of Cardiology (ESC); European Association for
  Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS), Vahanian A, Alfieri O, Andreotti F et
  al. Guidelines~on the management of valvular heart
  disease~(version~2012). Eur Heart J. 2012;33:2451-96.
\item
  Nishimura RA, Otto CM, Bonow RO et al; American College of
  Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice
  Guidelines. 2014 AHA/ACC guideline for the management of patients with
  valvular heart disease: executive summary: a report of the American
  College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on
  Practice Guidelines. \emph{J Am Coll Cardiol} 2014;63: 2438--88.
\item
  Puri R, Iung B, Cohen DJ, Rod\selectlanguage{ngerman}és-Cabau J. TAVI or No TAVI: identifying
  patients unlikely to benefit from transcatheter aortic valve
  implantation. \emph{Eur Heart J} . 2016;37:2217-25.
\item
  Dubois C,~Coosemans M,~Rega F et al. Prospective evaluation of
  clinical outcomes in all-comer high-risk patients with aortic valve
  stenosis undergoing medical treatment, transcatheter or surgical
  aortic valve implantation following heart team
  assessment.\emph{Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg} . 2013;17:492-500.
\item
  Kaier K,~Gutmann A,~Vach W et al. ``Heart Team'' decision making in
  elderly patients with symptomatic aortic valve stenosis who underwent
  AVR or TAVI -- a look behind the curtain. Results of the prospective
  TAVI Calculation of Costs Trial (TCCT). \emph{EuroIntervention} .
  2015;11:793-8.
\item
  Meyer SR,~Shanks M,~Tyrrell BD et al. Outcomes of consecutive patients
  referred for consideration for transcatheter aortic valve implantation
  from encompassing health-care region. Am J Cardiol. 2013;112:1450-4.
\item
  Kappetein AP, Head SJ, Généreux P et al; Valve Academic Research
  Consortium (VARC)-2 Updated standardized endpoint definitions for
  transcatheter aortic valve implantation: the Valve Academic Research
  Consortium-2 consensus document. \emph{Eur Heart J} . 2012; 33:2403-18
\item
  Schumacher M, Holländer N, Schwarzer G, Binder H, Sauerbrei W.
  Prognostic Factor Studies. In: Crowley J, Hoering A,
  editors.\emph{Handbook of Statistics in Clinical Oncology} . 3 ed.
  Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2012. p.415-69.
\item
  Serruys PW, Morice MC, Kappetein AP et al; SYNTAX Investigators.
  Percutaneous Coronary Intervention versus Coronary-Artery Bypass
  Grafting for Severe Coronary Artery Disease. \emph{N Engl J Med} .
  2009;360:961--72.
\item
  Smith CR, Leon MB, Mack MJ, PARTNER Trial Investigators. Transcatheter
  versus surgical aortic-valve replacement in high-risk patients.\emph{N
  Engl J Med} 2011;364:2187--98.
\item
  Coylewright M, Mack MJ, Holmes DR, O`Gara PT. A call for an
  evidence-based approach to the Heart Team for patients with severe
  aortic stenosis. \emph{J Am Coll Cardiol} . 2015;65:1472-80.
\item
  Mack MJ, Leon MB, Thourani VH et al; PARTNER 3 Investigators.
  Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Replacement with a Balloon-Expandable Valve
  in Low-Risk Patients. \emph{N Engl J Med} . 2019;380:1695-705.
\item
  Popma JJ, Deeb GM, Yakubov SJ et al; Evolut Low Risk Trial
  Investigators. Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Replacement with a
  Self-Expanding Valve in Low-Risk Patients. \emph{N Engl J
  Med}2019;380:1706-15.
\item
  Iung B, Cachier A, Baron G et al. Decision-making in elderly patients
  with severe aortic stenosis: why are so many denied surgery? \emph{Eur
  Heart J} 2005; 26: 2714-20.
\item
  Nombela-Franco L, Ribeiro HB, Urena M et al. Significant mitral
  regurgitation left untreated at the time of aortic valve replacement:
  a comprehensive review of a frequent entity in the transcatheter
  aortic valve replacement era. \emph{J~Am~Coll~Cardiol}2014;63:2643-58.
\item
  Bedogni F, Latib A, De Marco F et al. Interplay Between Mitral
  Regurgitation and Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement With the
  CoreValve Revalving System: A Multicenter Registry.~\emph{Circulation}
  ~2013;128:2145--53.
\item
  Nombela-Franco L,~Eltchaninoff H,~Zahn R et al. Clinical impact and
  evolution of~mitral~regurgitation following transcatheter aortic valve
  replacement: a meta-analysis. \emph{Heart} 2015;101:1395-405.
\item
  Barreiro CJ,~Patel ND,~Fitton TP et al. Aortic valve replacement and
  concomitant mitral valve regurgitation in the elderly: impact on
  survival and functional outcome. \emph{Circulation} 2005;112:I443--7.
\item
  Ruel M, Kapila V, Price J, Kulik A, Burwash IG, Mesana TG. Natural
  history and predictors of outcome in patients with concomitant
  functional mitral regurgitation at the time of aortic valve
  replacement. \emph{Circulation} 2006;114:I541--6.
\item
  Litmathe J, Boeken U, Kurt M, Feindt P, Gams E. Predictive risk
  factors in double-valve replacement (AVR and MVR) compared to isolated
  aortic valve replacement. \emph{Thorac Cardiovasc Surg}2006;54:459-63.
\item
  Afilalo J, Mottillo S, Eisenberg MJ et al.~Addition of frailty and
  disability to cardiac surgery risk scores identifies elderly patients
  at high risk of mortality or major morbidity.~\emph{Circ Cardiovasc
  Qual Outcomes} ~2012;5:222--8.
\item
  Sundermann S, Dademasch A, Rastan A et al.~One-year follow-up of
  patients undergoing elective cardiac surgery assessed with the
  comprehensive assessment of frailty test and its simplified
  form.~\emph{Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg} ~2011;~13:~119--23
\item
  Green P, Woglom AE, Genereux P.~The impact of frailty status on
  survival after transcatheter aortic valve replacement in older adults
  with severe aortic stenosis: a single-center experience.~\emph{JACC
  Cardiovasc Interv~} 2012;5:974--81
\item
  Lindman BR, Alexander KP, O'gara PT, Afilalo J.~Futility, benefit, and
  transcatheter aortic valve replacement.~\emph{JACC Cardiovasc
  Interv~}2014;7:707--16.
\item
  Rattazzi M, Bertacco E, Del Vecchio A, Puato M, Faggin E, Pauletto P.
  Aortic valve calcification in chronic kidney disease. \emph{Nephrology
  Dialysis Transplantation} 2013;28:2968-76.
\item
  Kumar N, Khera R, Garg N et al. Comparison of Outcomes of
  Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients
  With Chronic Kidney Disease. \emph{Am J Cardiol} 2018;121:343-8.
\item
  Leon MB, Smith CR, Mack MJ et al; PARTNER 2 Investigators.
  Transcatheter or surgical aortic-valve replacement in
  intermediate-risk patients. \emph{N Engl J Med} 2016;374:1609--20.
\item
  Makkar RR, Fontana GP, Jilaihawi H et al; PARTNER Trial Investigators.
  Transcatheter aortic-valve replacement for inoperable severe aortic
  stenosis.~\emph{N Engl J Med} 2012;366:1696--704.
\end{enumerate}

\textbf{Hosted file}

\verb`Figure 1 HT.docx`  available at \url{https://authorea.com/users/352455/articles/476711-performance-of-the-heart-team-approach-in-daily-clinical-practice-in-high-risk-patients-with-aortic-stenosis}

\textbf{Hosted file}

\verb`Figure 2 HT.docx`  available at \url{https://authorea.com/users/352455/articles/476711-performance-of-the-heart-team-approach-in-daily-clinical-practice-in-high-risk-patients-with-aortic-stenosis}

\textbf{Hosted file}

\verb`Figure 3 HT.docx`  available at \url{https://authorea.com/users/352455/articles/476711-performance-of-the-heart-team-approach-in-daily-clinical-practice-in-high-risk-patients-with-aortic-stenosis}

\textbf{Hosted file}

\verb`Figure 4 HT.docx`  available at \url{https://authorea.com/users/352455/articles/476711-performance-of-the-heart-team-approach-in-daily-clinical-practice-in-high-risk-patients-with-aortic-stenosis}

\selectlanguage{english}
\FloatBarrier
\end{document}

