Key result
Self-expanding valves cut severe PPM ~63% vs balloon-expandable valves but increase pacemaker and PVL risk.
Why the study?
The optimal transcatheter aortic valve replacement strategy in patients with a small aortic annulus remains unclear.
Does transcatheter aortic valve replacement with self-expanding valves improve hemodynamics and clinical outcomes compared to balloon-expandable valves in patients with a small aortic annulus?
Meta-Analysis (n=13,846)
Does transcatheter aortic valve replacement with self-expanding valves improve hemodynamics and clinical outcomes compared to balloon-expandable valves in patients with a small aortic annulus?
Odds Ratio: 0.37
p-value: p=<0.00001
In patients with small aortic annuli, self-expanding valves offer superior hemodynamics and lower risk of patient-prosthesis mismatch compared to balloon-expandable valves, but at the cost of higher pacemaker and paravalvular leak risks, except in the extra-small annulus subgroup where safety risks were attenuated.
Guides valve selection in small annuli by weighing mismatch reduction against higher pacemaker and leak risks; extends comparative evidence without mortality difference.
The optimal transcatheter aortic valve replacement strategy in patients with a small aortic annulus (SAA) remains unclear. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing self-expanding valves (SEVs) to balloon-expandable valves (BEVs) in SAA patients. We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus for studies comparing SEVs and BEVs in patients with SAA defined by computed tomography. A random-effects model using the Der Simonian and Laird estimator was used to pool odds ratios (ORs) and mean differences (MDs). We identified 25 studies encompassing 13,846 patients (5633 BEV; 8213 SEV). SEVs demonstrated superior hemodynamics, including a larger indexed effective orifice area (MD: 0.20 cm2/m2; P < 0.00001), a lower mean transvalvular gradient (MD: -4.11 mm Hg; P < 0.00001), and a lower risk of severe patient-prosthesis mismatch (OR: 0.37; P < 0.00001). However, SEVs were associated with a higher risk of permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) (OR: 1.63; P = 0.0008) and moderate or severe paravalvular leak (PVL) (OR: 2.26; P < 0.00001). There was no significant difference in all-cause mortality at 1 year (OR: 0.96; P = 0.55) or stroke at 30 days (OR: 1.34; P = 0.18). Notably, in a subgroup analysis restricted to patients with extra-small annuli (area <400 mm2 or diameter <23 mm), the hemodynamic advantages of SEVs persisted while the elevated risks of PPI and PVL were no longer statistically significant. In patients with SAA, SEVs provide better hemodynamics but carry safety concerns including higher risks of PVL and PPI in the overall population. These risks were not observed in the extra-small annulus subgroup. Valve selection should be individualized based on patient anatomy and procedural risk profile.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Abdelrahman et al. (2026) conducted a meta-analysis in Small aortic annulus (n=13,846). Self-expanding valves vs. Balloon-expandable valves was evaluated on Severe patient-prosthesis mismatch (OR 0.37, p=<0.00001). Self-expanding valves reduced severe patient-prosthesis mismatch (OR 0.37; P<0.00001) compared to balloon-expandable valves in small aortic annuli, but increased pacemaker and paravalvular leak risk.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: