Abstract
Objectives Our aim was to compare available transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) valves using direct and indirect evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCT).
Background TAVR is now an established treatment for majority of patients with severe aortic stenosis. However, there is limited data comparing various valves.
Methods We performed a systematic search of electronic databases for RCT comparing a TAVR valve to a valve or surgery. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed to compile evidence from both direct and indirect comparisons at 30 days and at one year.
Results Twelve studies with 10,307 patients eligible for TAVR met the criteria and were included. Self-expanding valve CoreValve type (SEV_C) is associated with higher risk of pacemaker implantation and use of >1 valve, SEV Accurate type (SEV_A) is associated with higher risk of ≥ moderate aortic regurgitation (AR) and death, and mechanically expandable valve (MEV) is associated with lower risk of ≥ moderate AR but higher risk of pacemaker at 30 days, SEV_C and MEV were associated with higher pacemaker rates compared balloon expandable valve (BEV) at 1 year. There is no difference among the valves in stroke at 30 days and 1 year.
Conclusions At 30 days, BEV was superior on one or more outcomes of mortality, pacemaker implantation, >1 valve implantation, and ≥ moderate AR compared to other valves except the higher rate ≥?moderate AR compared to MEV. At one year, BEV was associated with lower odds of pacemaker implantation compared to SEV_C and MEV but not different on other end points.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data produced in the present work are contained in the manuscript.
