SAVR appeared to be associated with improved survival beyond 2 years compared to TAVR in low-risk patients, but this benefit was observed only in propensity score-matched studies and not in RCTs.
Meta-Analysis
Does TAVR improve survival compared to SAVR in low-risk patients?
In low-risk patients, SAVR may be associated with improved midterm survival compared to TAVR, though this finding is currently driven by observational data rather than randomized trials.
p-value: p=0.398
=0.398). Conclusions In comparison with TAVR, SAVR appeared to be associated with improved survival beyond 2 years in low-risk patients. However, the survival benefit of SAVR was observed only in PSM studies and not in RCTs. The addition of data from ongoing RCTs as well as longer follow-up in previous RCTs will help to confirm if there is a difference in mid- and long-term survival between TAVR versus SAVR in the low-risk population.
Sá et al. (Mon,) conducted a meta-analysis in Aortic valve disease in low-risk patients. Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement (TAVR) vs. Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement (SAVR) was evaluated on Survival (p=0.398). SAVR appeared to be associated with improved survival beyond 2 years compared to TAVR in low-risk patients, but this benefit was observed only in propensity score-matched studies and not in RCTs.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: