Key result
Myval shows similar 18-month mortality to Acurate Neo, but with less mild paravalvular leak.
Why the study?
The study aimed to compare short- and mid-term clinical outcomes of the balloon-expandable Myval and self-expanding Acurate Neo transcatheter heart valves in TAVR.
Does the balloon-expandable Myval valve improve clinical outcomes and reduce complications compared to the self-expanding Acurate Neo valve in patients undergoing TAVR for severe symptomatic aortic stenosis?
Cohort (n=147)
No
Does the balloon-expandable Myval valve improve clinical outcomes and reduce complications compared to the self-expanding Acurate Neo valve in patients undergoing TAVR for severe symptomatic aortic stenosis?
Absolute Event Rate: 21.5% vs 9.6%
p-value: p=NS
The balloon-expandable Myval and self-expanding Acurate Neo valves demonstrated comparable mid-term safety and efficacy for TAVR, though mild paravalvular leak was more common with the Acurate Neo valve.
Comparable TAVR outcomes with Myval and Acurate Neo; leaves open whether randomized trials confirm higher mild paravalvular leak with Acurate Neo.
Background and Objectives: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has become an established treatment for severe symptomatic aortic stenosis, and continuous technological advances have led to the development of different transcatheter heart valve (THV) systems. This study aimed to compare the short- and mid-term clinical outcomes of the balloon-expandable Myval (Meril Life Sciences, India) and the self-expanding Acurate Neo (Boston Scientific, MA, USA) transcatheter heart valves during a mean follow-up of 18 months. Materials and Methods: This retrospective single-center study included consecutive patients who underwent transfemoral TAVR with either the Myval or Acurate Neo valve between January 2020 and September 2022. Demographic, clinical, laboratory, electrocardiographic, echocardiographic, procedural, and follow-up data were collected and compared. Clinical outcomes were evaluated according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium-3 (VARC-3) criteria. Results: A total of 147 patients were included (Myval, n = 116; Acurate Neo, n = 31). Predilatation was performed in all patients in the Acurate Neo group but in only 22 (18.9%) patients in the Myval group (p < 0.001). In-hospital mild paravalvular leak (PVL) was more frequent in the Acurate Neo group (38.7% vs. 20.6%; p = 0.038), whereas moderate or greater PVL did not differ between the groups. During a mean follow-up of 18 months (range, 10–32 months), mild PVL remained significantly more frequent in the Acurate Neo group (p = 0.028). No significant differences were observed between the two valve systems regarding mortality, permanent pacemaker implantation, or other major VARC-3 clinical outcomes. Conclusions: The Myval and Acurate Neo transcatheter heart valves demonstrated comparable short- and mid-term clinical outcomes in patients undergoing TAVR. Although mild PVL was more frequent with the Acurate Neo valve, mortality, permanent pacemaker implantation, and moderate or greater PVL were similar between the two valve systems, supporting the safety and effectiveness of both prostheses in the treatment of severe symptomatic aortic stenosis.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yerlikaya et al. (2026) conducted a cohort in Severe symptomatic aortic stenosis (n=147). Myval transcatheter heart valve vs. Acurate Neo transcatheter heart valve was evaluated on Mortality at mean 18-month follow-up (p=NS). The Myval and Acurate Neo transcatheter heart valves demonstrated comparable mortality (21.5% vs 9.6%, p=NS) and major clinical outcomes at 18 months, though mild paravalvular leak was more frequent with Acurate Neo (38.7% vs 19.8%, p=0.028).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: