+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Meta-Analysis of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Severe Aortic Valve Stenosis



Meta-Analysis of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Severe Aortic Valve Stenosis



American Journal of Cardiology 117(2): 252-257



Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a viable option in the treatment of severe aortic stenosis in patients at high risk for surgery. We sought to further investigate outcomes in patients at low to intermediate risk with aortic stenosis who underwent surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) versus TAVR. We systematically searched the electronic databases, MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane for prospective cohort studies of the effects of TAVR versus SAVR on clinical outcomes (30-day mortality, all-cause mortality, stroke and myocardial infarction, major vascular complications, paravalvular regurgitation, permanent pacemaker implantation, major bleeding, and acute kidney injury). We identified 5 clinical studies, examining 1,618 patients in the TAVR group and 1,581 patients in the SAVR group with an average follow-up of 1.05 years. No difference in all-cause mortality, stroke, and myocardial infarction between the 2 approaches was found. TAVR was associated with higher rates of vascular complications, permanent pacemaker implantation, and moderate or severe paravalvular regurgitation (p <0.001 for all), whereas more major bleeding events were seen in the SAVR group (p <0.001). In conclusion, TAVR was found to have similar survival and stroke rates and lower major bleeding rates as compared with SAVR in patients at low or intermediate surgical risk. However, SAVR was associated with less pacemaker placements and paravalvular regurgitation rates.

Please choose payment method:






(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 058296257

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 26639040

DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2015.10.034


Related references

Systematic review and meta-analysis of transcatheter aortic valve implantation versus surgical aortic valve replacement for severe aortic stenosis. Annals of Cardiothoracic Surgery 2(1): 10-23, 2013

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation versus surgical aortic valve replacement for severe aortic stenosis: a meta analysis. Chinese Medical Journal 126(6): 1171-1177, 2013

A meta-analysis of mortality and major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events following transcatheter aortic valve implantation versus surgical aortic valve replacement for severe aortic stenosis. American Journal of Cardiology 112(6): 850-860, 2013

Comparative performance of transcatheter aortic valve-in-valve implantation versus conventional surgical redo aortic valve replacement in patients with degenerated aortic valve bioprostheses: systematic review and meta-analysis. European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery 53(3): 495-504, 2018

Transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with diabetes and severe aortic stenosis at high risk for surgery: an analysis of the PARTNER Trial (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valve). Journal of the American College of Cardiology 63(11): 1090-1099, 2014

Cost-effectiveness of transcatheter aortic valve replacement compared with surgical aortic valve replacement in high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis: results of the PARTNER (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves) trial (Cohort A). Journal of the American College of Cardiology 60(25): 2683-2692, 2012

Valvular performance and aortic regurgitation following transcatheter aortic valve replacement using Edwards valve versus CoreValve for severe aortic stenosis: A Meta-analysis. Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine 17(4): 248-255, 2016

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation vs. surgical aortic valve replacement for treatment of severe aortic stenosis: a meta-analysis of randomized trials. European Heart Journal 37(47): 3503-3512, 2016

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation versus surgical aortic valve replacement in intermediate-risk patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis. Revue Medicale de Liege 71(6): 302-307, 2016

Comparison of complications and outcomes to one year of transcatheter aortic valve implantation versus surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with severe aortic stenosis. American Journal of Cardiology 109(10): 1487-1493, 2012

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement for Severe Aortic Stenosis in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease Stages 3b to 5. Annals of Thoracic Surgery 102(2): 540-547, 2016

Thirty-Day Readmissions After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis in New York State. Circulation. Cardiovascular Interventions 8(8): E002744, 2015

Two-Year Outcomes in Patients With Severe Aortic Valve Stenosis Randomized to Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement: The All-Comers Nordic Aortic Valve Intervention Randomized Clinical Trial. Circulation. Cardiovascular Interventions 9(6):, 2016

The cost-effectiveness of transcatheter aortic valve implantation versus surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with severe aortic stenosis at high operative risk. Heart 99(13): 914-920, 2013

Comparison of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement to Improve Quality of Life in Patients >70 Years of Age with Severe Aortic Stenosis. Brazilian Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery 31(1): 1-6, 2016