What does this research mean for the field?

The Evolut PRO+ valve demonstrates a positive implantation depth difference of 2.42 mm, indicating deeper Left Coronary Cusp implantation compared to the Evolut FX and Navitor valves. Novelty: ClaimNovelty.CONFIRMATORY. Consensus alignment: ConsensusAlignment.NEUTRAL.

What question did this study set out to answer?

The aim is to explore how different spine structures in self-expanding valves affect the implantation depth of transcatheter aortic valve replacements.

February 11, 2026

The Verification of Co‐Axiality of the Three Self‐Expanding Transcatheter Aortic Valve Systems According to the Difference in Shaft Spine

Resultado clave

At no recapture, PRO+ with double spines had greater positive IDD (2.42mm), Navitor negative IDD (–2.16mm), and FX showed near co-axial implantation (IDD 1.01mm, p < 0.001).

Puntos clave

The aim is to explore how different spine structures in self-expanding valves affect the implantation depth of transcatheter aortic valve replacements.
Retrospective analysis of 95 severe aortic stenosis patients undergoing transfemoral TAVR using three self-expanding valves.
Measured implantation depth difference between Left Coronary Cusp and Non-Coronary Cusp at point of no recapture.
Used angiographic evaluations to determine positive and negative implantation depths.
Significant differences in implantation depth among the three valve types were observed (p < 0.001).
PRO+ showed a positive implantation depth difference, indicating deeper LCC implantation.
Navitor exhibited a negative IDD, indicating shallower implantation, and FX demonstrated co-axiality.

PICO estructurado

Does the delivery catheter shaft spine design of self-expanding transcatheter aortic valves affect co-axiality and implantation depth difference in patients with severe aortic stenosis?

Población

95 patients with severe aortic stenosis who underwent transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) using self-expanding valves (PRO+: 41, FX: 21, and Navitor: 33 patients) from January 2021 to July 2023.

Intervención

Transfemoral TAVR using self-expanding valves with different delivery catheter shaft spine designs (Evolut PRO+ with double spine, Evolut FX with single spine, or Navitor with non-spine).

Comparador

Comparison among the three different self-expanding valve systems (Evolut PRO+, Evolut FX, and Navitor).

Resultado

Implantation depth difference (IDD) between Left Coronary Cusp (LCC) and Non-Coronary Cusp (NCC) measured angiographically at the point of no recapture.surrogate

The single-spine Evolut FX system achieves better co-axiality during TAVR deployment compared to the double-spine Evolut PRO+ (which tends toward a vertical axis) and the non-spine Navitor (which tends toward a horizontal axis).

Resultado numérico

Tasa de eventos absoluta: 0% vs 0%

Resumen

ABSTRACT Background Accurate bioprosthesis implantation depth during transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is crucial for optimal outcomes. Self‐expanding valves (SEVs) have evolved delivery catheter designs, from a double spine shaft in Evolut PRO+ (PRO + ) to single spine in Evolut FX (FX) and non‐spine in Navitor, to improve access deliverability. Aims To investigate the influence of different spine structures on valve implantation. Methods Retrospectively, we investigated 95 severe aortic stenosis patients who underwent transfemoral TAVR using SEVs (PRO + : 41, FX: 21, and Navitor: 33 patients) from January 2021 to July 2023. The implantation depth difference (IDD) between Left Coronary Cusp (LCC) and Non‐Coronary Cusp (NCC) was measured angiographically at the point of no recapture, defined as subtracting NCC implantation depth from LCC. Positive IDD indicates deeper LCC than NCC, also shown as “vertical axis.” Whereas negative IDD indicates shallower LCC than NCC, demonstrated as “horizontal axis.” Results IDD at the point of no recapture showed significant difference among three groups (PRO + : 2.42 0.81–3.42, FX: 1.01 0.29–1.77, Navitor: –2.16–2.74– (–1.14) mm, p FX/Navitor, FX > Navitor). PRO+ had a positive IDD, indicating deeper LCC implantation. Navitor had a negative IDD, demonstrating shallower implantation on LCC, and FX showed co‐axial implantation. Conclusion PRO+ with double spines showed vertical axis, Navitor with non‐spine showed horizontal axis, whereas FX demonstrated co‐axiality at the point of no recapture. This knowledge may help refine the manipulation of procedural implantation based on the shaft rigidity in each device to gain co‐axiality.

Preguntar a la IA

Me gusta

Guardar

Cite This Study

Teng et al. (Sun,) reported a other. At no recapture, PRO+ with double spines had greater positive IDD (2.42mm), Navitor negative IDD (–2.16mm), and FX showed near co-axial implantation (IDD 1.01mm, p < 0.001).

synapsesocial.com/papers/698c1c73267fb587c655eea4 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.70512

Preguntar a la IA

Me gusta

Guardar