Meta-analysis of Valve-in-valve Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Versus Redo-surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Failed Bioprosthetic Aortic Valve.

Like Comment
This meta-analysis was conducted to compare clinical outcomes of valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation (ViV-TAVI) versus redo-surgical aortic valve replacement (Redo-SAVR) in failed bioprosthetic aortic valves. We conducted a comprehensive review of previous publications of all relevant studies through August 2020. Twelve observational studies were included with a total of 8,430 patients, and a median-weighted follow-up period of 1.74 years. A pooled analysis of the data showed no significant difference in all-cause mortality (OR 1.15; 95% CI 0.93 - 1.43; p=0.21), cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, permanent pacemaker implantation, and the rate of moderate to severe paravalvular leakage between ViV-TAVI and Redo-SAVR groups. The rate of major bleeding (OR 0.36; 95% CI 0.16 - 0.83, p=0.02), procedural mortality (OR 0.41; 95% CI 0.18 - 0.96, p=0.04), 30-day mortality (OR 0.58; 95% CI 0.45 - 0.74, p<0.0001), and the rate of stroke (OR 0.65; 95% CI 0.52 - 0.81,p=0.0001) were significantly lower in the ViV- TAVI arm when compared to Redo-SAVR arm. The mean transvalvular pressure gradient was significantly higher post-implantation in the ViV-TAVI group when compared to the Redo-SAVR arm (Mean difference 3.92; 95% CI 1.97 - 5.88, p<0.0001). In conclusion, compared to Redo-SAVR, ViV-TAVI is associated with a similar risk of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, permanent pacemaker implantation, and the rate of moderate to severe paravalvular leakage. However, the rate of major bleeding, stroke, procedural mortality and 30-day mortality were significantly lower in the ViV-TAVI group when compared to Redo-SAVR.


View the full article @ The American Journal of Cardiology


Get PDF with LibKey

ClinOwl

The wider, wiser view for healthcare professionals. ClinOwl signposts the latest clinical content from over 100 leading medical journals.
5122 Contributions
2 Followers
0 Following

No comments yet.