Comparative meta-analysis of balloon-expandable and self-expandable valves for transcatheter aortic valve replacement

Shikhar Agarwal, Akhil Parashar, Dharam J. Kumbhani, Lars G. Svensson, Amar Krishnaswamy, E. Murat Tuzcu, Samir R. Kapadia

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

17 Scopus citations

Abstract

Abstract Background Balloon-expandable valves (BEVs) and self-expandable valves (SEVs) are two major types of valves utilized for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). We conducted a meta-analysis of available studies to compare the safety and efficacy of these two valve types. Methods Medline search was conducted using standard search terms to determine eligible studies. Primary outcomes of the meta-analysis included death and stroke at 30 days and 1 year. Pooled estimates of procedural outcomes were also compared between the valve types. Analysis was performed for entire cohort and separately for patients undergoing transfemoral TAVR (TF-TAVR). Results Analysis of entire cohort revealed similar 30-day mortality in the SEV and BEV cohorts. There was no significant difference in the incidence of stroke at 30 days between the two study groups. Both pooled comparisons demonstrated a significant heterogeneity with I<sup>2</sup> > 50%, necessitating the use of random effect modeling. We observed a significantly higher incidence of new pacemaker implantation, aortic regurgitation ≥ 2 + at 30 days, valve embolization, and need for > 1 valve following SEV implantation compared with BEV implantation. Analysis of TF-TAVR cohort showed higher 30 day [IRR (95% CI): 1.34 (1.19-1.52)] but a similar 1-year mortality [IRR (95% CI): 1.07 (0.96-1.19)] for SEV compared to BEV implantation. Conclusion Compared to BEV implantation, SEV implantation was associated with a similar risk of mortality and stroke at 30-day and 1-year follow-up duration. Analysis of the TF-TAVR cohort revealed a significantly higher mortality at 30 days among patients undergoing SEV implantation, compared with BEV implantation. In addition, there was a significantly higher incidence of other adverse events noted above, following SEV implantation, compared with BEV implantation.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number20658
Pages (from-to)87-97
Number of pages11
JournalInternational Journal of Cardiology
Volume197
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Aug 5 2015

    Fingerprint

Keywords

  • Aortic stenosis
  • Core Valve
  • Percutaneous valves
  • Sapien
  • TAVR

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this