TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparison of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Devices in Aortic Stenosis
T2 - A Network Meta-Analysis of 42,105 Patients
AU - Dogosh, Ala Abu
AU - Adawi, Ahlam
AU - El Nasasra, Aref
AU - Cafri, Carlos
AU - Barrett, Orit
AU - Tsaban, Gal
AU - Barashi, Rami
AU - Koifman, Edward
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 by the authors.
PY - 2022/9
Y1 - 2022/9
N2 - Background: In recent years, trans-catheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has emerged as an excellent alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). Currently, there are several approved devices on the market, yet comparisons among them are scarce. We aimed to compare the various devices via a network meta-analysis. Methods: We performed a network meta-analysis including randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and propensity-matched studies that provide comparisons of either a single TAVI with SAVR or two different TAVI devices and report clinical outcomes. Results: We included 12 RCT and 13 propensity-matched studies comprising 42,105 patients, among whom 27,134 underwent TAVI using various valve systems (Sapien & Sapien XT, Sapien 3, Corvalve, Evolut & Evolut Pro, Acurate Neo, Portico). The mean follow-up time was 23.4 months. Sapien 3 was superior over SAVR in the reduction of all-cause mortality (OR = 0.53; 95%CrI 0.31–0.91), while no significant difference existed between other devices and SAVR. Aortic regurgitation was more frequent among TAVI devices compared to SAVR. There was no significant difference between the various THVs and SAVR in cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, NYHA class III-IV, and endocarditis. Conclusions: Newer generation TAVI devices, especially Sapien 3 and Evolut R/Pro are associated with improved outcomes compared to SAVR and other devices of the older generation.
AB - Background: In recent years, trans-catheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has emerged as an excellent alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). Currently, there are several approved devices on the market, yet comparisons among them are scarce. We aimed to compare the various devices via a network meta-analysis. Methods: We performed a network meta-analysis including randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and propensity-matched studies that provide comparisons of either a single TAVI with SAVR or two different TAVI devices and report clinical outcomes. Results: We included 12 RCT and 13 propensity-matched studies comprising 42,105 patients, among whom 27,134 underwent TAVI using various valve systems (Sapien & Sapien XT, Sapien 3, Corvalve, Evolut & Evolut Pro, Acurate Neo, Portico). The mean follow-up time was 23.4 months. Sapien 3 was superior over SAVR in the reduction of all-cause mortality (OR = 0.53; 95%CrI 0.31–0.91), while no significant difference existed between other devices and SAVR. Aortic regurgitation was more frequent among TAVI devices compared to SAVR. There was no significant difference between the various THVs and SAVR in cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, NYHA class III-IV, and endocarditis. Conclusions: Newer generation TAVI devices, especially Sapien 3 and Evolut R/Pro are associated with improved outcomes compared to SAVR and other devices of the older generation.
KW - TAVI
KW - all-cause mortality
KW - aortic valve disease
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85138631100&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.3390/jcm11185299
DO - 10.3390/jcm11185299
M3 - ???researchoutput.researchoutputtypes.contributiontojournal.article???
C2 - 36142947
AN - SCOPUS:85138631100
SN - 2077-0383
VL - 11
JO - Journal of Clinical Medicine
JF - Journal of Clinical Medicine
IS - 18
M1 - 5299
ER -