Kanandya Kizzandy, Yehezkiel Gian Pradipta Pahu, Satria Rafi Ratmandhika, Krisanto Tanjaya, Elsafira Rana Rinanada, Muhammad Yusuf, Muhammad Reva Aditya, Imam Suseno Bayuadi
{"title":"Transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement for severe aortic stenosis in low-risk adults: a network meta-analysis.","authors":"Kanandya Kizzandy, Yehezkiel Gian Pradipta Pahu, Satria Rafi Ratmandhika, Krisanto Tanjaya, Elsafira Rana Rinanada, Muhammad Yusuf, Muhammad Reva Aditya, Imam Suseno Bayuadi","doi":"10.1007/s12055-026-02245-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare the safety and efficacy of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) versus surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in low-risk severe aortic stenosis, and to assess the differential impact of balloon-expandable (BE) and self-expanding (SE) valve platforms on clinical outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic search across seven databases was performed through May 2024. Frequentist and Bayesian network meta-analyses were conducted across three pre-specified time horizons: 30 days, 1 to 2 years, and 3 or more years. Results are reported as odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Egger's regression testing and randomized controlled trial (RCT)-only sensitivity analyses were performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty-one studies (37,741 patients) were included. All TAVR types demonstrated comparable short-term and intermediate-term mortality to SAVR, with TAVR-BE ranking most favourably by Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking (SUCRA) (81.2% and 87.7%); these rankings should be interpreted alongside the non-significant effect estimates. In exploratory ≥3-year analyses (k=10 studies, consistent with RCT-only sensitivity analyses), TAVR-Mixed showed significantly higher mortality than SAVR (OR 1.963 [95% CI 1.620 to 2.378]; p<0.001), while TAVR-BE and TAVR-SE showed no significant difference. TAVR-BE significantly reduced 30-day rehospitalization (OR 0.625; p=0.007), stroke (OR 0.534; p=0.001), atrial fibrillation, acute kidney injury, and major bleeding versus SAVR. All TAVR platforms shortened hospital stay by approximately 4 days. SAVR was associated with significantly lower rates of paravalvular regurgitation and permanent pacemaker implantation at all time horizons.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In low-risk severe aortic stenosis, TAVR, particularly with balloon-expandable valves, appears to offer comparable short-term and intermediate-term survival with superior procedural safety versus SAVR. In exploratory ≥3-year analyses, SAVR was associated with lower mortality specifically within the heterogeneous TAVR-Mixed cohort; TAVR-BE and TAVR-SE showed no significant mortality difference from SAVR at this horizon, underscoring the importance of platform-specific and individualised decision-making.</p><p><strong>Supplementary information: </strong>The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12055-026-02245-1.</p>","PeriodicalId":13285,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery","volume":"42 9","pages":"1066-1088"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13437856/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12055-026-02245-1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/7/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: To compare the safety and efficacy of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) versus surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in low-risk severe aortic stenosis, and to assess the differential impact of balloon-expandable (BE) and self-expanding (SE) valve platforms on clinical outcomes.
Methods: A systematic search across seven databases was performed through May 2024. Frequentist and Bayesian network meta-analyses were conducted across three pre-specified time horizons: 30 days, 1 to 2 years, and 3 or more years. Results are reported as odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Egger's regression testing and randomized controlled trial (RCT)-only sensitivity analyses were performed.
Results: Thirty-one studies (37,741 patients) were included. All TAVR types demonstrated comparable short-term and intermediate-term mortality to SAVR, with TAVR-BE ranking most favourably by Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking (SUCRA) (81.2% and 87.7%); these rankings should be interpreted alongside the non-significant effect estimates. In exploratory ≥3-year analyses (k=10 studies, consistent with RCT-only sensitivity analyses), TAVR-Mixed showed significantly higher mortality than SAVR (OR 1.963 [95% CI 1.620 to 2.378]; p<0.001), while TAVR-BE and TAVR-SE showed no significant difference. TAVR-BE significantly reduced 30-day rehospitalization (OR 0.625; p=0.007), stroke (OR 0.534; p=0.001), atrial fibrillation, acute kidney injury, and major bleeding versus SAVR. All TAVR platforms shortened hospital stay by approximately 4 days. SAVR was associated with significantly lower rates of paravalvular regurgitation and permanent pacemaker implantation at all time horizons.
Conclusion: In low-risk severe aortic stenosis, TAVR, particularly with balloon-expandable valves, appears to offer comparable short-term and intermediate-term survival with superior procedural safety versus SAVR. In exploratory ≥3-year analyses, SAVR was associated with lower mortality specifically within the heterogeneous TAVR-Mixed cohort; TAVR-BE and TAVR-SE showed no significant mortality difference from SAVR at this horizon, underscoring the importance of platform-specific and individualised decision-making.
Supplementary information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12055-026-02245-1.
期刊介绍:
The primary aim of the Indian Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery is education. The journal aims to dissipate current clinical practices and developments in the area of cardiovascular and thoracic surgery. This includes information on cardiovascular epidemiology, aetiopathogenesis, clinical manifestation etc. The journal accepts manuscripts from cardiovascular anaesthesia, cardiothoracic and vascular nursing and technology development and new/innovative products.The journal is the official publication of the Indian Association of Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgeons which has a membership of over 1000 at present.DescriptionThe journal is the official organ of the Indian Association of Cardiovascular-Thoracic Surgeons. It was started in 1982 by Dr. Solomon Victor and ws being published twice a year up to 1996. From 2000 the editorial office moved to Delhi. From 2001 the journal was extended to quarterly and subsequently four issues annually have been printed out at time and regularly without fail. The journal receives manuscripts from members and non-members and cardiovascular surgeons. The manuscripts are peer reviewed by at least two or sometimes three or four reviewers who are on the panel. The manuscript process is now completely online. Funding the journal comes partially from the organization and from revenue generated by subscription and advertisement.