What question did this study set out to answer?

Evaluate the short-term outcomes of Evolut-R 34 mm and Sapien-3 29 mm in TAVR patients with annuli ≥26 mm.

March 9, 2018Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions

Performance of the Evolut‐R 34 mm versus Sapien‐3 29 mm in Transcatheter aortic valve replacement patients with larger annuli: Early outcome results of Evolut‐R 34 mm as compared with Sapien‐3 29 mm in patients with Annuli ≥26 mm

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Why the study?

Does the Evolut-R 34 mm valve improve short-term outcomes compared to the Sapien-3 29 mm valve in patients with severe aortic stenosis and large annuli (≥26 mm) undergoing TAVR?

Population

92 consecutive patients with severe aortic stenosis and annulus diameter ≥26 mm undergoing femoral approach…

Comparison

Evolut-R 34 mm transcatheter aortic valve… vs Sapien-3 29 mm transcatheter aortic valve…

Design

Cohort

Follow-up

in-hospital

Authors

AEAmnon EitanTechnion – Israel Institute of Technology JWJulian WittMedizinische Hochschule Hannover JSJan StriplingAlbertinen Diakoniewerk

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Comparable short-term outcomes support individualized selection in large annuli; leaves open long-term durability and outcome comparisons.

Key Points

Evaluate the short-term outcomes of Evolut-R 34 mm and Sapien-3 29 mm in TAVR patients with annuli ≥26 mm.
Prospective data collection from consecutive patients with severe aortic stenosis and annulus diameter >26 mm.
Patients underwent femoral approach TAVR between February 1, 2014, and August 19, 2017.
Implantation details for 55 Sapien-3 and 37 Evolut-R patients were compared.
Device success rate was 98.2% for Sapien-3 and 97.3% for Evolut-R (P = 1.0).
Composite peri-procedural complication rates were 7.3% for Sapien-3 and 2.7% for Evolut-R (P = .645).
Evolut-R produced significantly lower prosthetic valve gradients than Sapien-3 (maximal 11.2 mmHg vs 18.0 mmHg, P < .001).

Structured PICO

Does the Evolut-R 34 mm valve improve short-term outcomes compared to the Sapien-3 29 mm valve in patients with severe aortic stenosis and large annuli (≥26 mm) undergoing TAVR?

Population

92 consecutive patients with severe aortic stenosis and annulus diameter ≥26 mm undergoing femoral approach transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR)

Intervention

Evolut-R 34 mm transcatheter aortic valve replacement

Comparator

Sapien-3 29 mm transcatheter aortic valve replacement

Outcome

Composite endpoint of early safety in-hospitalsafety

In patients with large aortic annuli (≥26 mm) undergoing TAVR, the Evolut-R 34 mm valve provides superior hemodynamics compared to the Sapien-3 29 mm valve, with comparable early safety and a non-significant trend toward higher pacemaker rates.

Cite This Study

Eitan et al. (2018) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a70bb5931a3df824328fbdf https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.27588

Topics

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement TAVR in low-risk patients

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Implication

Comparable short-term outcomes support individualized selection in large annuli; leaves open long-term durability and outcome comparisons.

Performance of the Evolut‐R 34 mm versus Sapien‐3 29 mm in Transcatheter aortic valve replacement patients with larger annuli: Early outcome results of Evolut‐R 34 mm as compared with Sapien‐3 29 mm in patients with Annuli ≥26 mm

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Key Points

Structured PICO

Cite This Study

Topics

Performance of the Evolut‐R 34 mm versus Sapien‐3 29 mm in Transcatheter aortic valve replacement patients with larger annuli: Early outcome results of Evolut‐R 34 mm as compared with Sapien‐3 29 mm in patients with Annuli ≥26 mm

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Key Points

Structured PICO

Cite This Study

Also Consider

Topics

Also Consider