Why the study?
Outcomes of TAVR using the second-generation retrievable VenusA-Pro and VenusA-Plus delivery systems with the self-expanding VenusA-Valve had not yet been described.
Does TAVR with the VenusA-Pro delivery system improve 30-day all-cause mortality compared to the VenusA-Plus system in patients with severe aortic stenosis?
Does TAVR with the VenusA-Pro delivery system improve 30-day all-cause mortality compared to the VenusA-Plus system in patients with severe aortic stenosis?
The second-generation retrievable VenusA-Pro and VenusA-Plus delivery systems demonstrated favorable and comparable 30-day clinical and hemodynamic outcomes in patients with severe aortic stenosis, including those with bicuspid anatomy.
Background The outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) employing the second-generation retrievable VenusA-Pro and VenusA-Plus delivery systems with the self-expanding VenusA-Valve have not been described yet. This study aims to report the outcomes of these two second-generation delivery systems. Methods From January 2022 to April 2023, we prospectively enrolled patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing TAVR with VenusA-Pro from three centers across China in this first-in-man study and retrospectively identified those undergoing TAVR with VenusA-Plus. All outcomes were reported according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium 3 definition. The primary outcome was 30-day all-cause mortality. Results A total of 156 patients were included, of which 46 underwent TAVR with VenusA-Pro and 110 underwent TAVR with VenusA-Plus. The Society of Thoracic Surgeons median score was 2.1%, bicuspid anatomy prevalence rate was 55.1%, and the mean aortic root calcification volume was 693 mm 3 . The technical success rate was 91.7%, comparable between the VenusA-Pro and VenusA-Plus groups (87.0% vs. 93.6%, P = 0.169). The 30-day all-cause mortality was 2.6%, similar between the VenusA-Pro and VenusA-Plus groups (2.2% vs. 2.7%, P = 0.842). No myocardial infarction occurred. The incidences of stroke (0.6%), major bleeding (3.8%), major vascular complications (5.1%), acute kidney injury (9.0%), permanent pacemaker implantation (5.1%), new-onset atrial fibrillation (5.8%), and moderate-to-severe paravalvular aortic regurgitation (6.0%) were favorable and comparable between the two groups. The clinical outcomes were similar between the patients with bicuspid and tricuspid aortic valve, except that the incidence of permanent pacemaker implantation was lower in patients with bicuspid anatomy (1.2% vs. 10.6%, P = 0.010). Conclusions The 30-day outcomes of TAVR with VenusA-Pro and VenusA-Plus were favorable and comparable.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Li et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: