Safety outcomes of new versus old generation transcatheter aortic valves

Objective: To compare procedural outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) patients who were implanted with older versus newer generation valves. Background: The current evidence base for improved safety of the newer commercially available TAVI valves is limited. Methods: A retrospective analysis of the Israeli multicenter TAVI registry was performed. Patients were stratified by valve generation of four commercially available devices: Edwards Sapien (ESX) Edwards Sapien S3 (ES3), Medtronic CoreValve (MCV), and Medtronic Evolut R (MER). Results: The cohort consisted of 737 patients with new generation valves (NGVs; ES3 n = 223; MER n = 514) and 1,869 with old generation valves (OGVs; MCV n = 1,181; ESX n = 688). Device success rates were significantly higher in NGV (97.5 versus 95.4%), with less post-procedural paravalvular leak (3 versus 5.8%), and valve mal-positioning (1.2 versus 3.4%); all P-values<0.05. There were no differences in rates of permanent pacemaker implantation, stroke or acute kidney injury (AKI) of any stage between the groups, although stage ≥2 AKI was more prevalent in NGV. After adjustment to significant differences in baseline patient and procedural characteristics, device success was higher (OR 1.86, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.09–3.18, P = 0.023) and the 1-month safety outcome was significantly lower (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.55–0.96, P = 0.025) for NGV. Device success was driven mainly by improved rates of PVL of ES3, while the safety outcome was mainly driven by improved rates of life-threatening bleeding and valve mal-positioning of MER. Conclusion: As compared to OGV, use of NGV for TAVI was associated with higher rates of device success and lower rates of adverse events.