Transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in low-risk surgical patients: A meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a valid option for patients with high or intermediate surgical risk. However, clinical outcomes of TAVR in low-risk patients are lacking. Our aim was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of TAVR versus surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in low-su...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Cardiovascular revascularization medicine 2019-10, Vol.20 (10), p.838-842
Main Authors: Kheiri, Babikir, Osman, Mohammed, Abubakar, Hossam, Subahi, Ahmed, Chahine, Adam, Ahmed, Sahar, Bachuwa, Ghassan, Alkotob, Mohammad L., Hassan, Mustafa, Bhatt, Deepak L.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Aortic stenosis
Low risk
SAVR
TAVR
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a valid option for patients with high or intermediate surgical risk. However, clinical outcomes of TAVR in low-risk patients are lacking. Our aim was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of TAVR versus surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in low-surgical-risk patients. Electronic database review was conducted for all randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that compared TAVR versus SAVR in low-risk patients. We calculated risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using a random-effects model. We included 3 RCTs totaling 604 patients (310 TAVR and 294 SAVR). Our results showed no significant difference in mortality between TAVR compared with SAVR (RR = 0.71; 95% CI = 0.22–2.30; P = 0.56), however, there was a significantly increased risk of pacemaker implantation (RR = 7.28; 95% CI = 3.94–13.42; P 
ISSN:1553-8389
1878-0938
DOI:10.1016/j.carrev.2018.12.023