Key result
Self-expanding transcatheter heart valves show no difference versus balloon-expandable valves in 2-year MACCE.
Why the study?
Midterm data comparing clinical outcomes after successful implantation of self-expanding and balloon-expandable transcatheter heart valves were limited.
Does a self-expanding transcatheter heart valve compared to a balloon-expandable transcatheter heart valve improve clinical outcomes in patients undergoing successful TAVI?
Cohort (n=1,256)
Yes
Does a self-expanding transcatheter heart valve compared to a balloon-expandable transcatheter heart valve improve clinical outcomes in patients undergoing successful TAVI?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
In patients undergoing successful TAVI, the choice between self-expanding and balloon-expandable valves did not significantly impact the 2-year risk of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events.
BACKGROUND: Midterm data comparing clinical outcomes after successful implantation of self-expanding and balloon-expandable transcatheter heart valves (THV) are limited. We aimed to compare 2-year outcomes after successful transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with the Edwards balloon-expandable or the Medtronic self-expanding THV. METHODS: Two-year outcomes were analyzed according to the implanted THV in the GALILEO trial. Major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) was a composite of all-cause death or thromboembolic events including stroke, myocardial infarction, symptomatic valve thrombosis, systemic embolism, deep-vein thrombosis, or pulmonary embolism. RESULTS: Among 1644 patients recruited in 136 centers across 16 countries between 2015 and 2018, 499 received a self-expanding and 757 patients received a balloon-expandable THV. Patients treated with a self-expanding THV were more likely to be female, and had higher surgical risk, lower hemoglobin levels, and more frequent valve-in-valve procedures than those with a balloon-expandable THV. After multivariable adjustment, there were no significant differences in major clinical outcomes between self-expanding versus balloon-expandable THV: MACCE (17.0% vs. 13.4%, adjusted-hazard ratios [HR] 1.18, 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 0.82-1.69); all-cause death (11.4% vs. 9.3%, adjusted-HR 1.26; 95% CI: 0.78-2.05); cardiovascular death (8.5% vs. 4.0%, adjusted-HR 1.53; 95% CI: 0.82-2.86), any stroke (5.1% vs. 3.7%, adjusted-HR 0.86; 95% CI: 0.43-1.73); major or life-threatening bleeding (5.9% vs. 6.8%, adjusted-HR 0.93; 95% CI: 0.53-1.63). CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov. NCT02556203. CONCLUSIONS: Two-year follow-up data from the GALILEO trial indicate that successful TAVI either with self-expanding or balloon-expandable THVs according to physician discretion did not show difference in rates of MACCE.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Okuno et al. (2022) conducted a cohort in Severe symptomatic aortic valve stenosis (n=1,256). Self-expanding transcatheter heart valves vs. Balloon-expandable transcatheter heart valves was evaluated on Major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) (HR 1.18, 95% CI 0.82-1.69, p=0.382). Self-expanding transcatheter heart valves did not significantly differ from balloon-expandable valves in the 2-year rate of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (17.0% vs. 13.4%, HR 1.18).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: