Key result
Second-generation TAVR valves show no significant mortality reduction over first-generation devices in pure AR.
Why the study?
The use of TAVR in patients with pure native aortic valve regurgitation and the comparative outcomes between first and second generation valves were not well summarized.
Does transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) provide acceptable 30-day mortality and device success in patients with pure native aortic valve regurgitation, and do second-generation valves improve outcomes compared to first-generation?
Meta-Analysis (n=638)
Does transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) provide acceptable 30-day mortality and device success in patients with pure native aortic valve regurgitation, and do second-generation valves improve outcomes compared to first-generation?
Absolute Event Rate: 7% vs 15%
p-value: p=0.059
TAVR is a feasible treatment for high-risk patients with pure native aortic valve regurgitation, with second-generation valves demonstrating significantly higher device success and a trend toward lower 30-day mortality.
Supports TAVR feasibility in high-risk NAVR; extends evidence favoring second-generation over first-generation valves for device success.
This systematic review and meta‐analysis sought to summarize the available evidence on the use of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in patients with Native Aortic Valve Regurgitation (NAVR) and compare outcomes between first and second generation valves. Owing to the improvements in transcatheter heart valve design and procedural success, TAVR has become increasingly performed in broader aortic valve pathologies. We searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane, and Scopus databases from 2007 to 2018 and performed a systematic review on reports with at least 10 patients with aortic valve regurgitation undergoing TAVR procedure. The main outcome of interest was all‐cause mortality at 30 days. A total of 638 patients across 12 studies were included. Mean age ranged from 68 to 84. Society of Thoracic Surgeons score ranged from 5.4% to 13.1% and Logistic EuroSCORE ranged from 18.2% to 33%. The incidence rate of all‐cause mortality at 30 days was found to be 11% (95% CI 7%‐16%; I2 = 20.86%). All‐cause mortality at 30 days for first generation valves had an incidence rate of 15% (95% CI 10%‐20%; I2 = 10%) compared to 7% (95% CI 3%‐13%; I2 = 37%) in second generation valves with subgroup interaction analysis P = 0.059. Device success incidence rate in second generation valves was 92% (95% CI 83%‐99%; I2 = 67%) vs 68% (95% CI 59%‐77%; I2 = 53%) in first generation valves with P = 0.001. TAVR appears to be a feasible treatment choice for NAVR patients at high risk for surgical valve replacement. Second generation valves show promising results in terms of short‐term outcomes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Haddad et al. (2018) conducted a meta-analysis in Native Aortic Valve Regurgitation (n=638). Second generation transcatheter heart valves vs. First generation transcatheter heart valves was evaluated on All-cause mortality at 30 days (p=0.059). Second-generation TAVR valves had a 30-day all-cause mortality of 7% compared to 15% for first-generation valves in patients with native aortic valve regurgitation (P=0.059).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: