Key result
TAVR reduces 1-year stroke risk ~23% versus SAVR in non-high-risk aortic stenosis.
Why the study?
Evidence comparing the incidence of stroke at 1 and 2 years after TAVR versus SAVR in non-high-risk patients was needed to inform clinical decision-making regarding the safety and effectiveness of these interventions.
Does transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) reduce the incidence of stroke at 1 and 2 years post-procedure compared to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in non-high-risk patients with aortic stenosis?
Meta-Analysis (n=9,865)
Randomized controlled trials included
Does transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) reduce the incidence of stroke at 1 and 2 years post-procedure compared to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in non-high-risk patients with aortic stenosis?
In non-high-risk patients with aortic stenosis, TAVR significantly reduces the risk of stroke at 1 year compared to SAVR, though this statistically significant difference is no longer observed at 2 years.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Supports TAVR over SAVR to reduce 1-year stroke in non-high-risk aortic stenosis; confirms and extends prior RCT evidence in pooled analysis.
Background: To compare the incidence of stroke at 1 and 2 years following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) versus surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR), aiming to inform clinical decision-making regarding the safety and effectiveness of these interventions. Methods: A random-effects meta-analysis was conducted including 9 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with a total of 9865 patients. The primary endpoint was the incidence of stroke at 1 and 2 years post-procedure. Results: At 1 year, TAVR was associated with a lower incidence of stroke compared with SAVR (odds ratio (OR), 0.77; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.61–0.98; p = 0.03). No significant difference was observed at 2 years (OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.65–1.17; p = 0.37). Conclusions: TAVR significantly reduces the risk of stroke within 1 year post-procedure compared with SAVR; however, this effect was not maintained at 2 years. These findings highlight the early benefit of TAVR, while the long-term advantage requires further investigation. The PROSPERO Registration: This study has been registered with PROSPERO, registration number: CRD42025636191, https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42025636191.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Liu et al. (2026) conducted a meta-analysis in Aortic stenosis (non-high surgical risk) (n=9,865). Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) vs. Surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) was evaluated on Incidence of stroke at 1 year post-procedure (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.61–0.98, p=0.03). TAVR significantly reduced 1-year stroke incidence compared with SAVR in non-high-risk aortic stenosis patients (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.61–0.98, p=0.03), with no significant difference at 2 years.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: