Balloon-versus self-expandable transcatheter aortic valve implantation in small aortic annuli: a meta-analysis of randomized and propensity studies.

IF 3.1 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Massimo Baudo, Serge Sicouri, Yoshiyuki Yamashita, Dimitrios Magouliotis, Francesco Cabrucci, Sarah Carnila, Basel Ramlawi
{"title":"Balloon-versus self-expandable transcatheter aortic valve implantation in small aortic annuli: a meta-analysis of randomized and propensity studies.","authors":"Massimo Baudo, Serge Sicouri, Yoshiyuki Yamashita, Dimitrios Magouliotis, Francesco Cabrucci, Sarah Carnila, Basel Ramlawi","doi":"10.1007/s12928-025-01105-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The hemodynamic and clinical differences between balloon- (BEV) and self-expandable valves (SEV) are critical for patients with a small aortic annulus (SAA). This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the clinical and hemodynamic performance of these two systems in patients with severe aortic stenosis and SAA. A systematic review was conducted from inception to June 2024 for randomized and propensity-score studies comparing BEV and SEV outcomes in patients with a SAA. Reconstructed individual patient data (IPD) from Kaplan Meier curves was pooled for overall survival and rehospitalization for heart failure. Nine studies with 2856 patients met our inclusion criteria: 1427 in the BEV group and 1429 in the SEV group. SEV demonstrated superior hemodynamic performance, including improved iEOA (Standardized Mead Difference [SMD]: 0.52, p = 0.0012), lower mean gradients (SMD: - 0.89, p < 0.0001), and reduced PPM (Odds Ratio [OR]: 0.38, p < 0.0001) compared to BEV. BEV presented lower new pacemaker rates compared to SEV (OR: 1.52, p = 0.0447). There were no significant differences between SEV and BEV in terms of rates of > mild paravalvular leaks, early stroke, and Valve Academic Research Consortium-defined outcomes. Reconstructed IPD showed no significant differences in overall survival (Hazard Ratio [HR]: 0.95, p = 0.584) and rehospitalization for heart failure (HR: 1.05, p = 0.828) during follow-up. In patients with SAA undergoing TAVI the use of BEV was associated with higher frequency of PPM and/or pressure gradients. Similar early stroke, survival and rehospitalization rates were reported. Pacemaker rates were higher with SEV. Long-term follow-up studies are required, especially with newer-generation devices.</p>","PeriodicalId":9439,"journal":{"name":"Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12928-025-01105-w","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The hemodynamic and clinical differences between balloon- (BEV) and self-expandable valves (SEV) are critical for patients with a small aortic annulus (SAA). This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the clinical and hemodynamic performance of these two systems in patients with severe aortic stenosis and SAA. A systematic review was conducted from inception to June 2024 for randomized and propensity-score studies comparing BEV and SEV outcomes in patients with a SAA. Reconstructed individual patient data (IPD) from Kaplan Meier curves was pooled for overall survival and rehospitalization for heart failure. Nine studies with 2856 patients met our inclusion criteria: 1427 in the BEV group and 1429 in the SEV group. SEV demonstrated superior hemodynamic performance, including improved iEOA (Standardized Mead Difference [SMD]: 0.52, p = 0.0012), lower mean gradients (SMD: - 0.89, p < 0.0001), and reduced PPM (Odds Ratio [OR]: 0.38, p < 0.0001) compared to BEV. BEV presented lower new pacemaker rates compared to SEV (OR: 1.52, p = 0.0447). There were no significant differences between SEV and BEV in terms of rates of > mild paravalvular leaks, early stroke, and Valve Academic Research Consortium-defined outcomes. Reconstructed IPD showed no significant differences in overall survival (Hazard Ratio [HR]: 0.95, p = 0.584) and rehospitalization for heart failure (HR: 1.05, p = 0.828) during follow-up. In patients with SAA undergoing TAVI the use of BEV was associated with higher frequency of PPM and/or pressure gradients. Similar early stroke, survival and rehospitalization rates were reported. Pacemaker rates were higher with SEV. Long-term follow-up studies are required, especially with newer-generation devices.

经导管气囊与自膨胀主动脉瓣植入小主动脉环:随机和倾向研究的荟萃分析。
对于小主动脉环(SAA)患者,球囊瓣膜(BEV)和自膨胀瓣膜(SEV)的血流动力学和临床差异至关重要。本荟萃分析旨在评价这两种系统在严重主动脉狭窄和SAA患者中的临床和血流动力学表现。从开始到2024年6月,对比较SAA患者BEV和SEV结果的随机和倾向评分研究进行了系统评价。来自Kaplan Meier曲线的重建个体患者数据(IPD)汇总了总生存率和心力衰竭再住院率。9项研究共2856例患者符合我们的纳入标准:BEV组1427例,SEV组1429例。SEV表现出优越的血流动力学性能,包括改善iEOA(标准化Mead差[SMD]: 0.52, p = 0.0012),降低平均梯度(SMD: - 0.89, p轻度瓣旁泄漏),早期卒中和瓣膜学术研究协会定义的结果。重建IPD在随访期间的总生存率(风险比[HR]: 0.95, p = 0.584)和心力衰竭再住院率(HR: 1.05, p = 0.828)无显著差异。在接受TAVI的SAA患者中,BEV的使用与更高的PPM频率和/或压力梯度相关。报告的早期卒中、生存率和再住院率相似。SEV患者起搏器率更高。需要长期的随访研究,特别是新一代的器械。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics
Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
12.50%
发文量
68
期刊介绍: Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics (CVIT) is an international journal covering the field of cardiovascular disease and includes cardiac (coronary and noncoronary) and peripheral interventions and therapeutics. Articles are subject to peer review and complete editorial evaluation prior to any decision regarding acceptability. CVIT is an official journal of The Japanese Association of Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信