RESUMO
Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a safe and effective treatment option for patients with severe aortic stenosis at intermediate or high surgical risk. Results after TAVR in low-risk patients are very encouraging at mid-term follow-up while limited long-term (≥ 3-year) data are available in this subset of patients. This meta-analysis aims to compare the long-term follow-up after TAVR versus surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in low-risk patients. We searched databases up to July 7th 2024, for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing TAVR versus SAVR in low-risk patients (defined as STS-PROM Score less than 4%). (PROSPERO ID: CRD42023480495). Primary outcome analysed was all-cause death at minimum 3-year follow-up. Secondary outcomes were: cardiovascular death, disabling stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), aortic valve reintervention, endocarditis, new-onset atrial fibrillation, permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) and bioprosthetic valve failure (BVF). A total of 3 RCTs with 2,644 patients (TAVR, n=1,371 patients; SAVR, n=1,273 patients) were included. Follow-up time was 6 ± 2.9 years. TAVR resulted non-inferior to SAVR for all-cause death [RR: 0.99 (95% CI: 0.84-1.17; p=0.89; I2=28%)], cardiovascular death [RR: 0.94 (95% CI: 0.76-1.15; p=0.54; I2=0%)], MI [RR: 1.06 (95% CI: 0.71-1.57; p=0.79; I2=61%)], aortic valve reintervention, endocarditis and BVF. New-onset atrial fibrillation was higher in the SAVR group, while PPI in the TAVR group. In conclusion our meta-analysis showed that TAVR is associated with similar long-term outcomes compared to SAVR in selected, low-risk patients.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The new balloon-expandable (BE) Myval transcatheter heart valves (THV) has shown promising early results with low paravalvular leak (PVL) and permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) rates. Limited data are available regarding its long-term performance. We aimed to compare the 2-year clinical and echocardiographic outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) using the self-expanding (SE) Evolut R and the BE Myval THVs. METHODS: The EVAL study included 166 patients with severe aortic valve stenosis who underwent TAVR either with SE Evolut R (n = 108) or BE Myval (n = 58) THV. Primary objectives include comparison on clinical efficacy (freedom from all-cause mortality, stroke, and cardiovascular hospitalization), echocardiographic performance and PPI rates between the two THVs. RESULTS: At 2-year the BE Myval group showed higher clinical efficacy (86% vs. 66%,HR:2.62, 95%CI 2.2-5.1;p = 0.006), with fewer cardiac hospitalizations (3.4% vs. 13.9%,p = 0.03). No significant differences in all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, or stroke rates were observed. The proportion of patients with ≥moderate PVL was significantly lower in the BE Myval compared to the SE Evolut R group (4%vs. 22%,p = 0.008). The mean transvalvular gradient was significantly higher in the SE group compared to the BE group (9.5 ± 4.3 vs. 6.9 ± 2.2 mmHg,p < 0.001), however there was no difference in the percentage of patients with a mean gradient ≥20 mmHg between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Both THVs offer similar 2-year clinical outcomes. The BE Myval THV demonstrated advantages with higher clinical efficacy and lower PVL incidence. Longer follow-up and randomized trials are needed to validate these results and assess Myval's sustained performance and durability.
Assuntos
Estenose da Valva Aórtica , Próteses Valvulares Cardíacas , Acidente Vascular Cerebral , Substituição da Valva Aórtica Transcateter , Humanos , Desenho de Prótese , Estenose da Valva Aórtica/diagnóstico por imagem , Estenose da Valva Aórtica/cirurgia , Valva Aórtica/diagnóstico por imagem , Valva Aórtica/cirurgia , Resultado do Tratamento , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/cirurgiaRESUMO
Abstract Objective: To evaluate the aortic wall elasticity using the maximal rate of systolic distension (MRSD) and maximal rate of diastolic recoil (MRDR) and their correlation with the aortic size index (ASI). Methods: Forty-eight patients with thoracic aortic aneurysm were enrolled in this study. A standard magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) protocol was used to calculate MRSD and MRDR. Both MRSD and MRDR were expressed as percentile of maximal area/10-3 sec. ASI (maximal aortic diameter/body surface area) was calculated. A correlation between MRSD, MRDR, ASI, and the patient's age was performed using regression plot. Results: A significant correlation between MRSD (t=-4,36; r2=0.29; P≤0.0001), MRDR (t=3.92; r2=0.25; P=0.0003), and ASI (25±4.33 mm/m2; range 15,48-35,14 mm/m2) is observed. As ASI increases, aortic MRSD and MRDR decrease. Such inverse correlation between MRSD, MRDR, and ASI indicates increased stiffness of the ascending aorta. A significant correlation between the patient's age and the decrease in MRSD and MRDR is observed. Conclusion: MRSD and MRDR are significantly correlated with ASI and the patient's age. They seem to describe properly the increasing stiffness of aortas. These two new indexes provide a promising, accessible, and reproducible approach to evaluate the biomechanical property of the aorta.