Transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement for severe aortic stenosis in low-risk adults: a network meta-analysis.

IF 0.6 Q4 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
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.

经导管与手术主动脉瓣置换术治疗低危成人严重主动脉瓣狭窄:网络荟萃分析
目的:比较经导管主动脉瓣置换术(TAVR)与外科主动脉瓣置换术(SAVR)治疗低危重度主动脉瓣狭窄的安全性和有效性,并评估球囊膨胀性(BE)和自膨胀性(SE)瓣膜平台对临床预后的不同影响。方法:到2024年5月,对7个数据库进行系统检索。频率分析和贝叶斯网络荟萃分析在三个预先指定的时间范围内进行:30天,1至2年和3年或更长时间。结果以95%置信区间(CI)的优势比(OR)报告。进行Egger回归检验和随机对照试验(RCT)敏感性分析。结果:纳入31项研究(37,741例患者)。所有TAVR类型均表现出与SAVR相当的短期和中期死亡率,TAVR- be在表面下累积排名(SUCRA)中排名最有利(81.2%和87.7%);这些排名应该与非显著效应估计一起解释。在探索性≥3年的分析中(k=10项研究,与仅rct的敏感性分析一致),TAVR- mixed的死亡率明显高于SAVR (OR 1.963 [95% CI 1.620至2.378])。结论:在低风险的严重主动脉瓣狭窄中,TAVR,特别是球囊可膨胀瓣膜,似乎提供了相当的短期和中期生存,与SAVR相比具有更高的程序安全性。在≥3年的探索性分析中,SAVR与较低的死亡率相关,特别是在异质性tavr混合队列中;TAVR-BE和TAVR-SE在这个水平上与SAVR的死亡率没有显著差异,强调了平台特异性和个性化决策的重要性。补充信息:在线版本包含补充资料,下载地址为10.1007/s12055-026-02245-1。
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
Indian Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
Indian Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
14.30%
发文量
141
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.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书