Key result
Self-expanding TAVR matches balloon-expandable valves for 12-month outcomes, delivering superior hemodynamics in small annuli.
Why the study?
Valve selection for TAVR in patients with a small aortic annulus remains a clinical challenge, with limited comparative data between self-expanding and balloon-expandable valves.
Does self-expanding TAVR improve clinical outcomes and valve hemodynamics compared to balloon-expandable TAVR in patients with severe aortic stenosis and a small aortic annulus?
Does self-expanding TAVR improve clinical outcomes and valve hemodynamics compared to balloon-expandable TAVR in patients with severe aortic stenosis and a small aortic annulus?
In patients with severe aortic stenosis and a small aortic annulus, self-expanding valves are non-inferior to balloon-expandable valves for clinical outcomes while providing superior hemodynamic performance, though balloon-expandable valves may offer procedural advantages.
May guide valve selection for hemodynamics in small annuli; leaves open durability and procedural trade-off questions.
Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement (TAVR) has revolutionized the treatment of severe aortic stenosis, particularly in patients at intermediate or high surgical risk. However, valve selection in individuals with a small aortic annulus remains a clinical challenge. Comparative data on self-expanding (SE) and balloon-expandable (BE) valves are limited, and recent evidence has focused on identifying the optimal prosthesis for this subgroup. This review critically evaluates the comparative outcomes of SE and BE valves in patients with small aortic annuli, emphasizing findings from the Small Annuli Randomized to Evolut or SAPIEN Trial (SMART) and contextualizing them with evidence from major trials including CHOICE, SOLVE-TAVI, SCOPE I, and FRANCE-TAVI. The SMART trial demonstrated that SE valves were non-inferior to BE valves for the composite endpoint of death, disabling stroke, or heart failure rehospitalization at 12 months, while achieving superior valve hemodynamics. SE valves were associated with lower mean gradients, larger effective orifice areas, and reduced rates of prosthesis–patient mismatch and bioprosthetic valve dysfunction. Other clinical studies have shown that BE valves may offer greater procedural precision, better positioning, and lower rates of paravalvular regurgitation. Both SE and BE valves represent effective options for TAVR in patients with small aortic annuli. SE valves provide improved hemodynamic performance, whereas BE valves may offer procedural advantages. Valve selection should be individualized based on anatomical characteristics and operator experience. Long-term studies are required to assess valve durability and late clinical outcomes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Naseer et al. (2025) studied this question. Self-expanding valves were non-inferior to balloon-expandable valves for adverse outcomes at 12 months and demonstrated superior hemodynamic performance in patients with small aortic annuli.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: