What question did this study set out to answer?

This study investigates how the angle of valve implantation affects its depth and the clinical outcomes for patients with aortic stenosis.

March 6, 2026SHILAP Revista de lepidopterologíaOpen Access

The influence of different transcatheter aortic valve implantation angles, as assessed by multidetector spiral CT scanning, on the depth of valve implantation and its impact on clinical prognosis

Q: What are the key findings of this study?

Commissural alignment during TAVI was associated with shallower implantation depth at the non-coronary cusp (6.95 mm vs. 7.15 mm, p=0.035), significantly lower rates of deep implantation (1.89% vs. 9.17%, p=0.020), fewer complications including paravalvular leakage (6.60% vs.19.27%, p=0.006) and pacemaker implantation (3.77% vs. 11.93%, p=0.027), and improved 1-month quality of life scores compared to misalignment in high-risk aortic stenosis patients.

Q: What is the clinical evidence from this study?

Study design: Cohort. Population: High-surgical-risk adults with severe aortic stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) (n=215). Intervention: Commissural alignment during TAVI vs. Commissural misalignment during TAVI. Primary outcome: Implantation depth and clinical complications at 30 days including paravalvular leakage, pacemaker implantation, valve dislocation, and quality of life by TASQ (Deep implantation rate 1.89% (Aligned) vs. 9.17% (Misaligned), p=0.020; Paravalvular leakage 6.60% vs. 19.27%, p=0.006; Pacemaker implantation 3.77% vs. 11.93%, p=0.027; Valve dislocation 5.66% vs. 15.60%, p=0.018, p=multiple significant p-values reported (<0.05)).

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Key result

TAVI commissural alignment is linked to ~66% less paravalvular leakage and fewer pacemaker implants.

Deep implantation rate 1.89% (Aligned) vs. 9.17% (Misaligned), p=0.020; Paravalvular leakage 6.60% vs. 19.27%, p=0.006; Pacemaker implantation 3.77% vs. 11.93%, p=0.027; Valve dislocation 5.66% vs. 15.60%, p=0.018
P multiple significant p-values reported (<0.05)
n=215

Why the study?

The study aimed to investigate the impact of commissural alignment on TAVI depth and clinical outcomes using multidetector spiral computed tomography assessment.

Does commissural alignment during TAVI improve implantation depth, reduce complications, and improve quality of life in high-surgical-risk aortic stenosis patients?

Population

215 high-surgical-risk AS patients undergoing TAVI

Comparison

Aligned (0–30° commissural offset) vs Misaligned (>30° offset)

Design

Retrospective cohort study

Follow-up

30-days

Authors

SZShuyi ZengShanghai Jiao Tong University XLXiangwen Liang

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Supports commissural alignment during TAVI in high-risk AS; extends prior evidence but hypothesis-generating and should not yet change practice.

Key Points

This study investigates how the angle of valve implantation affects its depth and the clinical outcomes for patients with aortic stenosis.
Retrospective cohort analysis of 215 high-surgical-risk patients undergoing TAVI.
Patients stratified into Aligned and Misaligned groups based on commissural angle from MSCT.
Primary endpoints included implantation depth, complications, and quality of life measured by TASQ.
Misaligned group had lower implantation depths and higher rates of complications.
Notable complications in misaligned patients included increased paravalvular leakage and pacemaker implantation.
Aligned patients reported significantly better quality of life scores at 1 month.

Study Design

Type

Cohort (n=215)

Multicenter

Structured PICO

Does commissural alignment during TAVI improve implantation depth, reduce complications, and improve quality of life in high-surgical-risk aortic stenosis patients?

Population

215 high-surgical-risk patients with aortic stenosis (AS) undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), mean age ~82.8, ~37% male, based in China. Key inclusion: excessively high surgical risk, unsuitable for open-heart surgery. Key exclusion: eGFR <35 mL/min, bicuspid aortic valves, valve-in-TAVI.

Intervention

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with commissural alignment (0-30° commissural offset between native and bioprosthetic valve commissures)

Comparator

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with commissural misalignment (>30° commissural offset)

Outcome

Implantation depth, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), 30-days complications, and quality of life (Toronto Aortic Stenosis Quality of Life questionnaire [TASQ])

Main Result

Effect estimate: Deep implantation rate 1.89% (Aligned) vs. 9.17% (Misaligned), p=0.020; Paravalvular leakage 6.60% vs. 19.27%, p=0.006; Pacemaker implantation 3.77% vs. 11.93%, p=0.027; Valve dislocation 5.66% vs. 15.60%, p=0.018

Absolute Event Rate: 6.95% vs 7.15%

p-value: p=multiple significant p-values reported (<0.05)

Achieving commissural alignment during TAVI optimizes implantation depth and significantly reduces early complications such as paravalvular leak and the need for permanent pacemakers.

Limitations

Retrospective single-center design limits causality and generalizability.
Short term follow-up limited to 1 month; long-term outcomes unknown.
Single valve platform type used, limiting applicability to other valve designs.
No standardized commissural alignment technique was used; real-world variability in operator practice.
Potential unmeasured confounders despite baseline matching.

Cite This Study

Zeng et al. (2026) conducted a cohort in High-surgical-risk adults with severe aortic stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) (n=215). Commissural alignment during TAVI vs. Commissural misalignment during TAVI was evaluated on Implantation depth and clinical complications at 30 days including paravalvular leakage, pacemaker implantation, valve dislocation, and quality of life by TASQ (Deep implantation rate 1.89% (Aligned) vs. 9.17% (Misaligned), p=0.020; Paravalvular leakage 6.60% vs. 19.27%, p=0.006; Pacemaker implantation 3.77% vs. 11.93%, p=0.027; Valve dislocation 5.66% vs. 15.60%, p=0.018, p=multiple significant p-values reported (<0.05)). Commissural alignment during TAVI was associated with shallower implantation depth at the non-coronary cusp (6.95 mm vs. 7.15 mm, p=0.035), significantly lower rates of deep implantation (1.89% vs. 9.17%, p=0.020), fewer complications including paravalvular leakage (6.60% vs.19.27%, p=0.006) and pacemaker implantation (3.77% vs. 11.93%, p=0.027), and improved 1-month quality of life scores compared to misalignment in high-risk aortic stenosis patients.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69aa6f3c531e4c4a9ff5956f https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2026.1694319

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Implication

Supports commissural alignment during TAVI in high-risk AS; extends prior evidence but hypothesis-generating and should not yet change practice.

The influence of different transcatheter aortic valve implantation angles, as assessed by multidetector spiral CT scanning, on the depth of valve implantation and its impact on clinical prognosis

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Key Points

Study Design

Structured PICO

Main Result

Limitations

Cite This Study

The influence of different transcatheter aortic valve implantation angles, as assessed by multidetector spiral CT scanning, on the depth of valve implantation and its impact on clinical prognosis

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Key Points

Study Design

Structured PICO

Main Result

Limitations

Cite This Study

Also Consider

Also Consider