Key result
TAVI in bicuspid aortic stenosis achieves 1-year outcomes comparable to tricuspid anatomy.
Why the study?
Current evidence for TAVI in bicuspid aortic valve is primarily based on Western registries, with scarce data from Africa and the Middle East.
Does transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) achieve comparable safety and efficacy in patients with bicuspid aortic valve stenosis compared to tricuspid aortic valve stenosis?
Cohort (n=267)
Yes
Does transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) achieve comparable safety and efficacy in patients with bicuspid aortic valve stenosis compared to tricuspid aortic valve stenosis?
Contemporary TAVI achieves comparable early and mid-term safety and efficacy outcomes in carefully selected patients with bicuspid versus tricuspid aortic valve stenosis.
Comparable outcomes in matched bicuspid TAVI support further study; leaves open need for randomized confirmation.
BACKGROUND: Current evidence regarding transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) is primarily based on Western registries, whereas data from Africa and the Middle East are scarce. OBJECTIVES: To assess the safety and efficacy of contemporary TAVI in patients with BAV, in comparison with tricuspid aortic valve (TAV). METHODS: = 267). Outcomes were adjudicated in accordance with Valve Academic Research Consortium-3 (VARC-3) criteria, with follow-up extending to 12 months. Propensity score (PS) matching (1:1) was applied to achieve balance in baseline characteristics. The incidence of all-cause mortality, stroke, and new permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation at 1 year did not differ meaningfully between groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this prospective multicenter cohort, contemporary TAVI achieved early and mid-term outcomes in carefully selected BAV patients comparable to tricuspid anatomy. These findings suggest the feasibility of TAVI in carefully selected BAV anatomies when guided by detailed computed tomography (CT)-based assessment and tailored procedural planning.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Assal et al. (2026) conducted a cohort in Bicuspid aortic valve stenosis (n=267). Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) vs. Tricuspid aortic valve (TAV) TAVI was evaluated on All-cause mortality, stroke, and new permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation (p=0.357). Transcatheter aortic valve implantation in bicuspid aortic valve stenosis achieved 1-year outcomes comparable to tricuspid anatomy for mortality, stroke, and pacemaker implantation (P=0.357).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: