Quality and transparency of evidence for implantable cardiovascular medical devices assessed by the CORE-MD consortium.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The European Union Medical Device Regulation 2017/745 challenges key stakeholders to follow transparent and rigorous approaches to the clinical evaluation of medical devices. The purpose of this study is a systematic evaluation of published clinical evidence underlying selected high-risk cardiovascular medical devices before and after market access in the European Union (CE-marking) between 2000 and 2021. METHODS: Pre-specified strategies were applied to identify published studies of prospective design evaluating 71 high-risk cardiovascular devices in seven different classes (bioresorbable coronary scaffolds, left atrial appendage occlusion devices, transcatheter aortic valve implantation systems, transcatheter mitral valve repair/replacement systems, surgical aortic and mitral heart valves, leadless pacemakers, subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator). The search time span covered 20 years (2000-21). Details of study design, patient population, intervention(s), and primary outcome(s) were summarized and assessed with respect to timing of the corresponding CE-mark approval. RESULTS: At least one prospective clinical trial was identified for 70% (50/71) of the pre-specified devices. Overall, 473 reports of 308 prospectively designed studies (enrolling 97 886 individuals) were deemed eligible, including 81% (251/308) prospective non-randomized clinical trials (66 186 individuals) and 19% (57/308) randomized clinical trials (31 700 individuals). Pre-registration of the study protocol was available in 49% (150/308) studies, and 16% (48/308) had a peer-reviewed publicly available protocol. Device-related adverse events were evaluated in 82% (253/308) of studies. An outcome adjudication process was reported in 39% (120/308) of the studies. Sample size was larger for randomized in comparison to non-randomized trials (median of 304 vs. 100 individuals, P < .001). No randomized clinical trial published before CE-mark approval for any of the devices was identified. Non-randomized clinical trials were predominantly published after the corresponding CE-mark approval of the device under evaluation (89%, 224/251). Sample sizes were smaller for studies published before (median of 31 individuals) than after (median of 135 individuals) CE-mark approval (P < .001). Clinical trials with larger sample sizes (>50 individuals) and those with longer recruitment periods were more likely to be published after CE-mark approval, and were more frequent during the period 2016-21. CONCLUSIONS: The quantity and quality of publicly available data from prospective clinical investigations across selected categories of cardiovascular devices, before and after CE approval during the period 2000-21, were deemed insufficient. The majority of studies was non-randomized, with increased risk of bias, and performed in small populations without provision of power calculations, and none of the reviewed devices had randomized trial results published prior to CE-mark certification.

Effects on Mortality and Major Bleeding of Radial Versus Femoral Artery Access for Coronary Angiography or Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Meta-Analysis of Individual Patient Data From 7 Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trials.

BACKGROUND: In some randomized clinical trials, transradial access (TRA) compared with transfemoral access (TFA) was associated with lower mortality in patients with coronary artery disease undergoing invasive management. We analyzed the effects of TRA versus TFA across multicenter randomized clinical trials and whether these associations are modified by patient or procedural characteristics. METHODS: We performed an individual patient data meta-analysis of multicenter randomized clinical trials comparing TRA with TFA among patients undergoing coronary angiography with or without percutaneous coronary intervention. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality and the co-primary outcome was major bleeding at 30 days. The primary analysis was conducted by 1-stage mixed-effects models on the basis of the intention-to-treat cohort. The effect of access site on mortality and major bleeding was assessed further by multivariable analysis. The relationship among access site, bleeding, and mortality was investigated by natural effect model mediation analysis with multivariable adjustment. RESULTS: A total of 21 600 patients (10 775 TRA, 10 825 TFA) from 7 randomized clinical trials were included. The median age was 63.9 years, 31.9% were women, 95% presented with acute coronary syndrome, and 75.2% underwent percutaneous coronary intervention. All-cause mortality (1.6% versus 2.1%; hazard ratio, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.63-0.95]; P=0.012) and major bleeding (1.5% versus 2.7%; odds ratio, 0.55 [95% CI, 0.45-0.67]; P<0.001) were lower with TRA. Subgroup analyses for mortality showed consistent results, except for baseline hemoglobin level (Pinteraction=0.003), indicating that the benefit of TRA was substantial in patients with moderate or severe anemia, whereas it was not significant in patients with milder or no baseline anemia. After adjustment, TRA remained associated with 24% and 51% relative risk reduction of all-cause mortality and major bleeding, respectively. A mediation analysis showed that the benefit of TRA on mortality was only partially driven by major bleeding prevention and ancillary mechanisms are required to fully explain the causal association. CONCLUSIONS: TRA is associated with lower all-cause mortality and major bleeding at 30 days compared with TFA. The effect on mortality was driven by patients with anemia. The reduction in major bleeding only partially explains the mortality benefit. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero; Unique identifier: CRD42018109664.

Watchman FLX vs. Watchman 2.5 in a Dual-Center Left Atrial Appendage Closure Cohort: the WATCH-DUAL study.

AIMS: No studies have compared Watchman 2.5 (W2.5) with Watchman FLX (FLX) devices to date. We aimed at comparing the FLX with W2.5 devices with respect to clinical outcomes, left atrial appendage (LAA) sealing properties and device-related thrombus (DRT). METHODS AND RESULTS: All consecutive left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) procedures performed at two European centres between November 2017 and February 2021 were included. Procedure-related complications and net adverse cardiovascular events (NACE) at 6 months after LAAC were recorded. At 45-day computed tomography (CT) follow-up, intra- (IDL) and peri- (PDL) device leak, residual patent neck area (RPNA), and DRT were assessed by a Corelab. Out of 144 LAAC consecutive procedures, 71 and 73 interventions were performed using W2.5 and FLX devices, respectively. There were no differences in terms of procedure-related complications (4.2% vs. 2.7%, P = 0.626). At 45-day CT, the FLX was associated with lower frequency of IDL [21.3% vs. 40.0%; P = 0.032; odds ratio (OR): 0.375; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.160-0.876; P = 0.024], similar rate of PDL (29.5% vs. 42.0%; P = 0.170), and smaller RPNA [6 (0-36) vs. 40 (6-115) mm2; P = 0.001; OR: 0.240; 95% CI: 0.100-0.577; P = 0.001] compared with the W2.5 group. At 45 days, rate of DRT as detected by CT and/or transoesophageal echocardiography (TOE), was higher with W2.5 (6.0% vs. 0%, P = 0.045). At 6-month follow-up, NACE did not differ between groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of consecutive LAACs, FLX as compared to W2.5, was associated with similar procedure-related complications and 6-month NACE, but with improved LAA neck coverage, and lower IDL and DRT.

Sodium intake, life expectancy, and all-cause mortality.

AIMS: Since dietary sodium intake has been identified as a risk factor for cardiovascular disease and premature death, a high sodium intake can be expected to curtail life span. We tested this hypothesis by analysing the relationship between sodium intake and life expectancy as well as survival in 181 countries worldwide. METHODS AND RESULTS: We correlated age-standardized estimates of country-specific average sodium consumption with healthy life expectancy at birth and at age of 60 years, death due to non-communicable diseases and all-cause mortality for the year of 2010, after adjusting for potential confounders such as gross domestic product per capita and body mass index. We considered global health estimates as provided by World Health Organization. Among the 181 countries included in this analysis, we found a positive correlation between sodium intake and healthy life expectancy at birth (ß = 2.6 years/g of daily sodium intake, R2 = 0.66, P < 0.001), as well as healthy life expectancy at age 60 (ß = 0.3 years/g of daily sodium intake, R2 = 0.60, P = 0.048) but not for death due to non-communicable diseases (ß = 17 events/g of daily sodium intake, R2 = 0.43, P = 0.100). Conversely, all-cause mortality correlated inversely with sodium intake (ß = -131 events/g of daily sodium intake, R2 = 0.60, P < 0.001). In a sensitivity analysis restricted to 46 countries in the highest income class, sodium intake continued to correlate positively with healthy life expectancy at birth (ß = 3.4 years/g of daily sodium intake, R2 = 0.53, P < 0.001) and inversely with all-cause mortality (ß = -168 events/g of daily sodium intake, R2 = 0.50, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Our observation of sodium intake correlating positively with life expectancy and inversely with all-cause mortality worldwide and in high-income countries argues against dietary sodium intake being a culprit of curtailing life span or a risk factor for premature death. These data are observational and should not be used as a base for nutritional interventions.

Effect of Alirocumab Added to High-Intensity Statin Therapy on Coronary Atherosclerosis in Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction: The PACMAN-AMI Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Coronary plaques that are prone to rupture and cause adverse cardiac events are characterized by large plaque burden, large lipid content, and thin fibrous caps. Statins can halt the progression of coronary atherosclerosis; however, the effect of the proprotein convertase subtilisin kexin type 9 inhibitor alirocumab added to statin therapy on plaque burden and composition remains largely unknown. Objective: To determine the effects of alirocumab on coronary atherosclerosis using serial multimodality intracoronary imaging in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Design, Setting, and Participants: The PACMAN-AMI double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial (enrollment: May 9, 2017, through October 7, 2020; final follow-up: October 13, 2021) enrolled 300 patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for acute myocardial infarction at 9 academic European hospitals. Interventions: Patients were randomized to receive biweekly subcutaneous alirocumab (150 mg; n = 148) or placebo (n = 152), initiated less than 24 hours after urgent percutaneous coronary intervention of the culprit lesion, for 52 weeks in addition to high-intensity statin therapy (rosuvastatin, 20 mg). Main Outcomes and Measures: Intravascular ultrasonography (IVUS), near-infrared spectroscopy, and optical coherence tomography were serially performed in the 2 non-infarct-related coronary arteries at baseline and after 52 weeks. The primary efficacy end point was the change in IVUS-derived percent atheroma volume from baseline to week 52. Two powered secondary end points were changes in near-infrared spectroscopy-derived maximum lipid core burden index within 4 mm (higher values indicating greater lipid content) and optical coherence tomography-derived minimal fibrous cap thickness (smaller values indicating thin-capped, vulnerable plaques) from baseline to week 52. Results: Among 300 randomized patients (mean [SD] age, 58.5 [9.7] years; 56 [18.7%] women; mean [SD] low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level, 152.4 [33.8] mg/dL), 265 (88.3%) underwent serial IVUS imaging in 537 arteries. At 52 weeks, mean change in percent atheroma volume was -2.13% with alirocumab vs -0.92% with placebo (difference, -1.21% [95% CI, -1.78% to -0.65%], P < .001). Mean change in maximum lipid core burden index within 4 mm was -79.42 with alirocumab vs -37.60 with placebo (difference, -41.24 [95% CI, -70.71 to -11.77]; P = .006). Mean change in minimal fibrous cap thickness was 62.67 µm with alirocumab vs 33.19 µm with placebo (difference, 29.65 µm [95% CI, 11.75-47.55]; P = .001). Adverse events occurred in 70.7% of patients treated with alirocumab vs 72.8% of patients receiving placebo. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with acute myocardial infarction, the addition of subcutaneous biweekly alirocumab, compared with placebo, to high-intensity statin therapy resulted in significantly greater coronary plaque regression in non-infarct-related arteries after 52 weeks. Further research is needed to understand whether alirocumab improves clinical outcomes in this population. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03067844.

ROB-MEN: a tool to assess risk of bias due to missing evidence in network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Selective outcome reporting and publication bias threaten the validity of systematic reviews and meta-analyses and can affect clinical decision-making. A rigorous method to evaluate the impact of this bias on the results of network meta-analyses of interventions is lacking. We present a tool to assess the Risk Of Bias due to Missing Evidence in Network meta-analysis (ROB-MEN). METHODS: ROB-MEN first evaluates the risk of bias due to missing evidence for each of the possible pairwise comparison that can be made between the interventions in the network. This step considers possible bias due to the presence of studies with unavailable results (within-study assessment of bias) and the potential for unpublished studies (across-study assessment of bias). The second step combines the judgements about the risk of bias due to missing evidence in pairwise comparisons with (i) the contribution of direct comparisons to the network meta-analysis estimates, (ii) possible small-study effects evaluated by network meta-regression, and (iii) any bias from unobserved comparisons. Then, a level of "low risk", "some concerns", or "high risk" for the bias due to missing evidence is assigned to each estimate, which is our tool's final output. RESULTS: We describe the methodology of ROB-MEN step-by-step using an illustrative example from a published NMA of non-diagnostic modalities for the detection of coronary artery disease in patients with low risk acute coronary syndrome. We also report a full application of the tool on a larger and more complex published network of 18 drugs from head-to-head studies for the acute treatment of adults with major depressive disorder. CONCLUSIONS: ROB-MEN is the first tool for evaluating the risk of bias due to missing evidence in network meta-analysis and applies to networks of all sizes and geometry. The use of ROB-MEN is facilitated by an R Shiny web application that produces the Pairwise Comparisons and ROB-MEN Table and is incorporated in the reporting bias domain of the CINeMA framework and software.

Integrative echocardiographic assessment of patients with secondary mitral regurgitation undergoing transcatheter edge-to-edge repair.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether the integrative echocardiographic criteria used in the cardiovascular outcomes assessment of the mitraclip percutaneous therapy (COAPT) for heart failure patients with functional mitral regurgitation study predict outcomes after edge-to-edge trancatheter mitral valve repair (TMVr) for the treatment of secondary mitral regurgitation (SMR). BACKGROUND: Two randomized controlled trials comparing TMVr to medical treatment reported conflicting findings. Differences in patient selection criteria may have contributed to these diverging results. METHODS: Patients undergoing TMVr were stratified following the integrative COAPT echocardiographic criteria in noneligible and eligible patients who were further classified into three tiers according to effective regurgitant orifice (EROA) (Tier 1: EROA ≥ 0.3cm2 ; Tier 2: EROA 0.2cm2 and 0.29cm2 ; Tier 3: EROA<0.2cm2 ) combined with several other severity criteria. We assessed between group differences in all-cause mortality, successful SMR reduction, and symptom relief from baseline to 2-year follow-up. RESULTS: Between March 2011 and March 2018, 138 patients (mean age 75 years) satisfying the inclusion criteria underwent TMVr for treatment of symptomatic SMR. The mean EROA area was 0.35 ± 0.17 mm2 . Ten patients (7%) died within 30 days, 29 (21%) within 12 months, and 41 (30%) within 2 years. After stratification according to the COAPT echocardiographic criteria that were fulfilled in 72% of the studied population, Tier 2 patients (45%), as well as noneligible patients (38%) had a higher mortality rate compared to those in Tier 1 (19%). CONCLUSIONS: SMR patients stratified into tiers according to the COAPT integrative echocardiographic criteria have diverging prognostic and symptomatic benefit after edge-to-edge TMVr.

Validation of high bleeding risk criteria and definition as proposed by the academic research consortium for high bleeding risk.

AIMS: To validate the set of clinical and biochemical criteria proposed by consensus by the Academic Research Consortium (ARC) for High Bleeding Risk (HBR) for the identification of HBR patients. These criteria were categorized into major and minor, if expected to carry in isolation, respectively, ≥4% and <4% Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) 3 or 5 bleeding risk within 1-year after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). High bleeding risk patients are those meeting at least 1 major or 2 minor criteria. METHODS AND RESULTS: All patients undergoing PCI at Bern University Hospital, between February 2009 and September 2018 were prospectively entered into the Bern PCI Registry (NCT02241291). Age, haemoglobin, platelet count, creatinine, and use of oral anticoagulation were prospectively collected, while the remaining HBR criteria except for planned surgery were retrospectively adjudicated. A total of 16 580 participants with complete ARC-HBR criteria were included. After assigning 1 point to each major and 0.5 point to each minor criterion, we observed for every 0.5 score increase a step-wise augmentation of BARC 3 or 5 bleeding rates at 1 year ranging from 1.90% among patients fulfilling no criterion, through 4.01%, 5.98%, 7.42%, 8.60%, 12.21%, 12.29%, and 17.64%. All major and five out of six minor criteria, conferred in isolation a risk for BARC 3 or 5 bleeding at 1 year exceeding 4% at the upper limit of the 95% confidence intervals. CONCLUSION: All major and the majority of minor ARC-HBR criteria identify in isolation patients at HBR.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation vs. surgical aortic valve replacement for treatment of symptomatic severe aortic stenosis: an updated meta-analysis.

AIMS: Owing to new evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in low-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis, we compared the collective safety and efficacy of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) vs. surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) across the entire spectrum of surgical risk patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: The meta-analysis is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42016037273). We identified RCTs comparing TAVI with SAVR in patients with severe aortic stenosis reporting at different follow-up periods. We extracted trial, patient, intervention, and outcome characteristics following predefined criteria. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality up to 2 years for the main analysis. Seven trials that randomly assigned 8020 participants to TAVI (4014 patients) and SAVR (4006 patients) were included. The combined mean STS score in the TAVI arm was 9.4%, 5.1%, and 2.0% for high-, intermediate-, and low surgical risk trials, respectively. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation was associated with a significant reduction of all-cause mortality compared to SAVR {hazard ratio [HR] 0.88 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78-0.99], P = 0.030}; an effect that was consistent across the entire spectrum of surgical risk (P-for-interaction = 0.410) and irrespective of type of transcatheter heart valve (THV) system (P-for-interaction = 0.674). Transcatheter aortic valve implantation resulted in lower risk of strokes [HR 0.81 (95% CI 0.68-0.98), P = 0.028]. Surgical aortic valve replacement was associated with a lower risk of major vascular complications [HR 1.99 (95% CI 1.34-2.93), P = 0.001] and permanent pacemaker implantations [HR 2.27 (95% CI 1.47-3.64), P < 0.001] compared to TAVI. CONCLUSION: Compared with SAVR, TAVI is associated with reduction in all-cause mortality and stroke up to 2 years irrespective of baseline surgical risk and type of THV system.

Early Detection of Subclinical Myocardial Damage in Chronic Aortic Regurgitation and Strategies for Timely Treatment of Asymptomatic Patients.

A series of hemodynamic and pathological responses occur in chronic aortic regurgitation, which eventually result in myocardial fibrosis and irreversible left ventricular dysfunction. According to guidelines, valvular surgery is recommended with the development of symptoms, left ventricular systolic dysfunction, or left ventricular dilatation. The optimal timing of surgical intervention has recently been questioned with documentation of irreversible myocardial damage resulting in incomplete left ventricular recovery and adverse clinical outcomes after surgery. Recognizing the shortcomings of the guidelines, we performed a comprehensive review on the novel diagnostic methods that have been shown to improve the detection of subclinical ventricular dysfunction in chronic aortic regurgitation and to improve prediction of outcomes.

Ultrathin-strut, biodegradable-polymer, sirolimus-eluting stents versus thin-strut, durable-polymer, everolimus-eluting stents for percutaneous coronary revascularisation: 5-year outcomes of the BIOSCIENCE randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Drug-eluting stents combining an ultrathin cobalt-chromium stent platform with a biodegradable polymer eluting sirolimus have been shown to be non-inferior or superior to thin-strut, durable-polymer, everolimus-eluting stents in terms of 1 year safety and efficacy outcomes. METHODS: In the randomised, single-blind, multicentre, non-inferiority BIOSCIENCE trial, we compared biodegradable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stents with durable-polymer everolimus-eluting stents in patients with chronic stable coronary artery disease or acute coronary syndromes. Here, we assess the final 5-year clinical outcomes of BIOSCIENCE with regards to the primary clinical outcome of target lesion failure, which was a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically indicated target lesion revascularisation. The primary analysis was done by intention to treat. The BIOSCIENCE trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01443104. FINDINGS: 2008 (95%) of 2119 patients recruited between March 1, 2012, and May 31, 2013, completed 5 years of follow-up. Target lesion failure occurred in 198 patients (cumulative incidence 20·2%) treated with biodegradable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stents and in 189 patients (18·8%) treated with durable-polymer everolimus-eluting stents (rate ratio [RR] 1·07, 95% CI 0·88-1·31; p=0·487). All-cause mortality was significantly higher in patients treated with biodegradable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stents than in those treated with durable-polymer everolimus-eluting stents (14·1% vs 10·3%; RR 1·36, 95% CI 1·06-1·75; p=0·017), driven by a difference in non-cardiovascular deaths. We observed no difference between groups in cumulative incidence of definite stent thrombosis at 5 years (1·6% in both groups; 1·02, 0·51-2·05; p=0·950). INTERPRETATION: 5-year risk of target lesion failure among all-comer patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention is similar after implantation of ultrathin-strut, biodegradable-polymer, sirolimus-eluting stents or thin-strut, durable-polymer, everolimus-eluting stents. Higher incidences of all-cause and non-cardiovascular mortality in patients treated with biodegradable-polymer stents eluting sirolimus than in those treated with durable-polymer stents eluting everolimus warrant careful observation in ongoing clinical trials. FUNDING: Clinical Trials Unit of the University of Bern and Biotronik.

Effect of statins and non-statin LDL-lowering medications on cardiovascular outcomes in secondary prevention: a meta-analysis of randomized trials.

Aims: Current evidence on dyslipidaemia management has expanded to novel treatments and very low achieved levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C). We sought to compare the clinical impact of more-intensive vs. less-intensive LDL-C lowering by means of statins and currently recommended non-statin medications in secondary prevention. Methods and results: We searched Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases for randomized controlled trials of statins, ezetimibe, proprotein convertase subtilisin-kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors, or bile acid sequestrants with >500 patients followed for ≥1 year. We employed random-effects models using risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to compare outcomes. We included 19 trials (15 of statins, 3 of PCSK9 inhibitors, and 1 of ezetimibe) with 152 507 patients randomly assigned to more-intensive (n = 76 678) or less-intensive treatment (n = 75 829). More-intensive treatment was associated with 19% relative risk reduction for the primary outcome, major vascular events (MVEs; RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.77-0.86). Risk reduction was greater across higher baseline levels and greater achieved reductions of LDL-C. The clinical benefit was significant across varying types of more-intensive treatment and was consistent for statins (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.76-0.86) and non-statin agents (PCSK9 inhibitors and ezetimibe; RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.77-0.94) as active (more-intensive) intervention (P-interaction = 0.38). Each 1.0 mmol/L reduction in LDL-C was associated with 19% relative decrease in MVE. Death, cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and coronary revascularization also favoured more-intensive treatment. Conclusion: Reduction of MVE is proportional to the magnitude of LDL-C lowering across a broad spectrum of on-treatment levels in secondary prevention. Statin intensification and add-on treatment with PCSK9 inhibitors or ezetimibe are associated with significant reduction of cardiovascular morbidity in this very high-risk population.

Latest evidence on transcatheter aortic valve implantation vs. surgical aortic valve replacement for the treatment of aortic stenosis in high and intermediate-risk patients.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The goal of this review is to summarize the current evidence supporting the use of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in high and intermediate-risk patients. The focus is on the five randomized controlled trials comparing TAVI with surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) published to date, as well as two recent meta-analyses. RECENT FINDINGS: TAVI has profoundly transformed the treatment of elderly patients presenting with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis. In experienced hands, the procedure has become well tolerated and the results more predictable. So far, two trials using two different devices [Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valve (PARTNER) 1A and US CoreValve High Risk] have shown that TAVI is able to compete in terms of mortality with SAVR in high-risk patients. These findings have been extended to the intermediate-risk population in two recently published randomized controlled trials [PARTNER 2 and Nordic Aortic Valve Intervention (NOTION)]. The two meta-analyses suggested improved survival in both high and intermediate-risk patients during the first 2 years following the intervention. The survival benefit was only found in patients treated via the transfemoral access, and appeared more pronounced in women. SUMMARY: Individual randomized trials enrolling high and intermediate-risk patients have established the noninferiority of TAVI in comparison with SAVR, whereas subsequent meta-analyses suggest superiority of transfemoral TAVI in terms of a sustained survival benefit 2 years after valve implantation irrespective of the surgical risk category. The benefit of TAVI appears more pronounced in women than in men.

Combining randomized and non-randomized evidence in network meta-analysis.

Non-randomized studies aim to reveal whether or not interventions are effective in real-life clinical practice, and there is a growing interest in including such evidence in the decision-making process. We evaluate existing methodologies and present new approaches to using non-randomized evidence in a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) when the aim is to assess relative treatment effects. We first discuss how to assess compatibility between the two types of evidence. We then present and compare an array of alternative methods that allow the inclusion of non-randomized studies in a network meta-analysis of RCTs: the naïve data synthesis, the design-adjusted synthesis, the use of non-randomized evidence as prior information and the use of three-level hierarchical models. We apply some of the methods in two previously published clinical examples comparing percutaneous interventions for the treatment of coronary in-stent restenosis and antipsychotics in patients with schizophrenia. We discuss in depth the advantages and limitations of each method, and we conclude that the inclusion of real-world evidence from non-randomized studies has the potential to corroborate findings from RCTs, increase precision and enhance the decision-making process. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.