Key result
There was no significant difference in clinical outcomes between self-expanding and balloon-expandable valves in patients with aortic stenosis and a small aortic annulus undergoing TAVR.
Why the study?
Does a self-expanding valve improve clinical outcomes compared to a balloon-expandable valve in patients with aortic stenosis and a small aortic annulus undergoing TAVR?
Does a self-expanding valve improve clinical outcomes compared to a balloon-expandable valve in patients with aortic stenosis and a small aortic annulus undergoing TAVR?
A letter to the editor discussing the SMART trial, which found no significant difference in clinical outcomes between self-expanding and balloon-expandable valves in TAVR patients with small annuli.
To the Editor: In their article on the Small Annuli Randomized to Evolut or SAPIEN Trial (SMART), Herrmann and colleagues (June 6 issue) 1 report the results of a head-to-head comparison of the self-expanding valve and the balloon-expendable valve in patients with aortic stenosis and a small aortic annulus (<430 mm 2 ) who were undergoing transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR). Although the finding of no significant difference in clinical outcomes between these two valve platforms is reassuring, some caution is needed when interpreting the results. Although patients with a small aortic annulus represent up to 40% of the population of patients undergoing TAVR, . . .
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
A 2024 study conducted a letter in aortic stenosis and a small aortic annulus. Self-expanding valve vs. Balloon-expandable valve was evaluated on clinical outcomes. There was no significant difference in clinical outcomes between self-expanding and balloon-expandable valves in patients with aortic stenosis and a small aortic annulus undergoing TAVR.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: