Key result
SAV improves durability and lowers reinterventions versus BAV in children over one with aortic stenosis.
Why the study?
Does surgical aortic valvuloplasty improve outcomes compared to balloon aortic valvuloplasty in pediatric patients with congenital aortic valve stenosis?
Meta-Analysis
Does surgical aortic valvuloplasty improve outcomes compared to balloon aortic valvuloplasty in pediatric patients with congenital aortic valve stenosis?
In pediatric patients with congenital aortic valve stenosis, surgical aortic valvuloplasty offers superior durability and lower reintervention rates compared to balloon valvuloplasty, particularly in children older than 1 year of age.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Supports preferring surgical over balloon aortic valvuloplasty in children older than 1 year; extends evidence for superior durability in congenital aortic stenosis.
= .01). There was no significant difference regarding the primary outcome or other studied outcomes.ConclusionIn patients with congenital aortic valve stenosis, SAV showed the greatest benefit in children older than 1 year of age with similar AVR and mortality rates; but superior durability, lower reintervention rates, and greater reductions in peak aortic pressure gradient when compared with BAV.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Atta et al. (2026) conducted a meta-analysis in Congenital Aortic Valve Stenosis. Surgical Aortic Valvuloplasty (SAV) vs. Balloon Aortic Valvuloplasty (BAV) was evaluated. Surgical aortic valvuloplasty in children >1 year with congenital aortic valve stenosis showed similar mortality but superior durability and lower reintervention rates compared with balloon valvuloplasty.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: