Scientific article
OA Policy
English

Transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with severe aortic stenosis at low and intermediate risk: systematic review and meta-analysis

Published inBMJ. British medical journal, vol. 354, i5130
Publication date2016
Abstract

Objective: To examine the effect of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) versus surgical replacement of an aortic valve (SAVR) in patients with severe aortic stenosis at low and intermediate risk of perioperative death.

Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL.

Study selection: Randomized trials of TAVI compared with SAVR in patients with a mean perioperative risk of death <8%.

Review methods: Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias for outcomes important to patients that were selected a priori by a parallel guideline committee, including patient advisors. We used the GRADE system was used to quantify absolute effects and quality of evidence.

Results: 4 trials with 3179 patients and a median follow-up of two years were included. Compared with SAVR, transfemoral TAVI was associated with reduced mortality (risk difference per 1000 patients: -30, 95% confidence interval -49 to -8, moderate certainty), stroke (-20, -37 to 1, moderate certainty), life threatening bleeding (-252, -293 to -190, high certainty), atrial fibrillation (-178, -150 to -203, moderate certainty), and acute kidney injury (-53, -39 to -62, high certainty) but increased short term aortic valve reintervention (7, 1 to 21, moderate certainty), permanent pacemaker insertion (134, 16 to 382, moderate certainty), and moderate or severe symptoms of heart failure (18, 5 to 34, moderate certainty). Compared with SAVR, transapical TAVI was associated higher mortality (57, -16 to 153, moderate certainty, P=0.015 for interaction between transfemoral versus transapical TAVI) and stroke (45, -2 to 125, moderate certainty, interaction P=0.012). No study reported long term follow-up, which is particularly important for structural valve deterioration.

Conclusions: Many patients, particularly those who have a shorter life expectancy or place a lower value on the risk of long term valve degeneration, are likely to perceive net benefit with transfemoral TAVI versus SAVR. SAVR, however, performs better than transapical TAVI, which is of interest to patients who are not candidates for transfemoral TAVI.

Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42016042879.

Citation (ISO format)
SIEMIENIUK, Reed A et al. Transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with severe aortic stenosis at low and intermediate risk: systematic review and meta-analysis. In: BMJ. British medical journal, 2016, vol. 354, p. i5130. doi: 10.1136/bmj.i5130
Main files (1)
Article (Published version)
Identifiers
Additional URL for this publicationhttps://www.bmj.com/content/354/bmj.i5130
Journal ISSN0959-8138
480views
293downloads

Technical informations

Creation18/11/2016 10:17:00
First validation18/11/2016 10:17:00
Update01/09/2025 13:27:19
Status update01/09/2025 13:27:19
Last indexation01/09/2025 13:27:20
All rights reserved by Archive ouverte UNIGE and the University of GenevaunigeBlack