Key result
The self-expanding ACURATE neo valve had comparable device failure (10.9% vs. 9.6%; OR 1.09, 95% CI 0.69-1.73; P=0.71) and 30-day early safety compared to the balloon-expandable SAPIEN 3 valve.
Why the study?
No comparative data are available for next-generation self-expanding ACURATE neo and balloon-expandable SAPIEN 3 transcatheter heart valves regarding device failure and early safety.
Does a self-expanding transcatheter heart valve compared to a balloon-expandable valve alter device failure and 30-day early safety in patients undergoing transcatheter heart valve replacement?
Cohort (n=933)
Yes
Does a self-expanding transcatheter heart valve compared to a balloon-expandable valve alter device failure and 30-day early safety in patients undergoing transcatheter heart valve replacement?
Odds Ratio: 1.09 (95% CI 0.69–1.73)
Absolute Event Rate: 10.9% vs 9.6%
p-value: p=0.71
Captured external expert commentary on this paper, strongest first. Original sources are linked where available.
“the Sapien 3 PPI requirement, although consistent with early Sapien 3 studies, is higher than what is now expected with the recent evolution towards a shallower implantation depth. Whether procedural changes (such as less aggressive pre-dilation) may also result in lower PPI requirements with ACURATE Neo remains to be seen”
“Identifying any differences between Acurate Neo and other [transcatheter heart valves] is critically important for it to survive in the increasingly crowded market”
“Both technologies have been used in large clinical registries with very good clinical outcomes. The only randomized comparison between both technologies in earlier-generation devices showed superiority for device success with balloon-expandable over self-expanding [transcatheter heart valves]; however, clinical outcome at 1 year was equivalent.”
Self-expanding (ACURATE neo) and balloon-expandable (SAPIEN 3) transcatheter heart valves demonstrate comparable 30-day safety and device failure rates, though with a differing profile of secondary procedural complications (PVL vs. pacemaker implantations).
OBJECTIVES: This study sought to compare 2 next-generation transcatheter heart valves (THV), the self-expanding ACURATE neo (NEO) and the balloon-expandable SAPIEN 3 (S3), in terms of device failure and early safety at 30 days. BACKGROUND: Deployment of these THV showed promising initial clinical results. However, no comparative data are available. METHODS: Of 1,121 treated patients at 3 centers, a 1-to-2 nearest neighbor matching was performed to identify 2 patients treated with S3 (n = 622) for each patient treated with NEO (n = 311). RESULTS: In-hospital complications were comparable between NEO and S3, including stroke (1.9% vs. 2.4%; p = 0.64), major vascular complications (10.3% vs. 8.5%; p = 0.38), or life-threatening bleeding (4.2% vs. 3.7%; p = 0.72). Device failure with NEO was comparable with S3 (10.9% vs. 9.6%; odds ratio: 1.09 [95% confidence interval: 0.69 to 1.73]; p = 0.71) with more paravalvular leakage (PVL II+, 4.8% vs. 1.8%; p = 0.01), but less elevated gradients (≥20 mm Hg, 3.2% vs. 6.9%; p = 0.02) and pacemaker implantations (9.9% vs. 15.5%; p = 0.02). Thirty-day mortality (2.3% vs. 1.9%; p = 0.74) and the early safety composite endpoint (15.8% vs. 15.6%; hazard ratio: 0.97 [95% confidence interval: 0.68 to 1.39]; p = 0.88) were similar with NEO and S3. CONCLUSIONS: Very high success rates were achieved for both valves, and the clinical and procedural results were comparable. Compared with S3, NEO was associated with less new pacemaker implantations and less elevated gradients, but with more paravalvular leakage.
Journal, society, and media accounts. Useful signal, not independent expert judgment.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hüsser et al. (2017) conducted a cohort in Aortic stenosis undergoing transcatheter heart valve replacement (n=933). Self-expanding ACURATE neo (NEO) transcatheter heart valve vs. Balloon-expandable SAPIEN 3 (S3) transcatheter heart valve was evaluated on Device failure (OR 1.09, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.73, p=0.71). The self-expanding ACURATE neo valve had comparable device failure (10.9% vs. 9.6%; OR 1.09, 95% CI 0.69-1.73; P=0.71) and 30-day early safety compared to the balloon-expandable SAPIEN 3 valve.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: