Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Low-risk Patients: A Meta-Analysis Based on a 2-Year Follow-Up.

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have shown that transcatheter aortic valve implantation is the best alternative therapy to surgical aortic valve replacement in high-risk surgical patients with aortic stenosis. However, it is not clear whether transcatheter aortic valve implantation can be utilized in low-risk surgical patients with aortic stenosis. This studyaimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of transcatheter aortic valve implantation in low-risk patients.

METHODS

From the outset of our initiative until April 2022, PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane database were thoroughly searched, yielding the selection of 3 randomized controlled trials including 2644 patients with aortic stenosis, to assess outcome measures at distinct follow-up time.

RESULTS

The mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality score of patients was 2.2. At the 30-day and 1-year follow-up, transcatheter aortic valve implan- tation was associated with a lower incidence of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mor- tality, acute kidney injury (stage 2 or 3), life-threatening or significant bleeding, and new atrial fibrillation but an increased risk of permanent pacemaker implantation. At the 2-year follow-up, transcatheter aortic valve implantation only had an advantage in new atrial fibrillation (relative risk, 0.27; 95% CI, 0.14-0.51; P < .0001), with no significant differ- ence in all-cause mortality or cardiovascular mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

For low-risk surgical patients with aortic stenosis, compared to surgical aortic valve replacement, transcatheter aortic valve implantation was associated with lower all-cause mortality at 30-day follow-up and lower cardiovascular mortality at 1-year follow-up. Except for the advantages in new atrial fibrillation, transcatheter aor- tic valve implantation had no significant impact on mortality at 2-year follow-up.