Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32246266›Full record

ArticleNetherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation2020

Randomised comparison of a balloon-expandable and self-expandable valve with quantitative assessment of aortic regurgitation using magnetic resonance imaging.

N H M Kooistra, M Abawi, M Voskuil, K Urgel, M Samim, F Nijhoff, H M Nathoe, P A F M Doevendans, S A J Chamuleau, G E H Leenders and 5 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01982032 (Edwards SAPIEN-3 Periprosthetic Leakage Evaluation Versus Medtronic CoreValve in Transfemoral Aortic Valve Implantation), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 27% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT01982032 naterminatednot on this map

Edwards SAPIEN-3 Periprosthetic Leakage Evaluation Versus Medtronic CoreValve in Transfemoral Aortic Valve Implantation (ELECT) Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorUMC UtrechtRan2013 to 2017Enrolled56ConditionsPeriprosthetic Aortic Valve Regurgitation After TAVIArmsTranscatheter aortic valve replacement, Medtronic CoreValve system, Edwards SAPIEN bioprosthesis
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Comments on: 'Randomised comparison of a balloon-expandable and self-expandable valve with quantitative assessment of aortic regurgitation using magnetic resonance imaging'.Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation · 2020
    Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

N H M KooistraDepartment of Cardiology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
M AbawiDepartment of Cardiology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
M VoskuilDepartment of Cardiology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands. mvoskuil@umcutrecht.nl.
K UrgelDepartment of Cardiology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
M SamimDepartment of Cardiology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
F NijhoffDepartment of Cardiology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
H M NathoeDepartment of Cardiology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
P A F M DoevendansDepartment of Cardiology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
S A J ChamuleauDepartment of Cardiology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
G E H LeendersDepartment of Cardiology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
T LeinerDepartment of Radiology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
A C AbrahamsDepartment of Nephrology and Hypertension, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
H B van der WorpDepartment of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Brain Centre Rudolf Magnus, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
P AgostoniDepartment of Cardiology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
P R StellaDepartment of Cardiology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
University Medical Center Utrecht · NLSt. Antonius Ziekenhuis · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionTranscatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a safe and effective treatment for inoperable, intermediate- or high-risk patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis and has been associated with excellent clinical outcomes. A clinically relevant remaining problem is aortic regurgitation (AR) post-TAVI, which is associated with increased mortality. Therefore, we conducted a prospective randomised trial to assess the safety and efficacy of a first-generation self-expandable valve (SEV; CoreValve) and a third-generation balloon-expandable valve (BEV; Sapien 3) with respect to clinical outcomes and AR as determined quantitatively by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

methodsThe ELECT study was an investigator-initiated, single-centre trial involving patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis and with a clinical indication for transfemoral TAVI. Fifty-six patients were randomly assigned to the BEV or SEV group.

resultsAR determined quantitatively by MRI was lower in the BEV than in the SEV group [regurgitant fraction: 1.1% (0-8.0) vs 8.7% (3.0-14.8) for SEV; p = 0.01]. Secondary endpoints according to the criteria of the Second Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC-2) showed BEV to have better early safety [0 (0%) vs 8 (30%); p = 0.002] at 30 days and a lower risk of stroke [0 (0%) vs 5 (21%); p = 0.01], major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events [0 (0%) vs 10 (38%); p < 0.001] or death [0 (0%) vs 5 (19%); p = 0.02] in the 1st year compared with SEV.

conclusionsThe use of the latest generation of BEV was associated with less AR as quantitatively assessed by MRI. Although the use of MRI to quantify AR is not feasible in daily clinical practice, it should be considered as a surrogate endpoint for clinical outcomes in comparative studies of valves for TAVI. ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT01982032.

Indexed as

Aortic valve stenosisBalloon-expandable heart valveMagnetic resonance imagingQuantitative aortic regurgitationSelf-expandable heart valveTranscatheter aortic valve implantation

Identifiers

PMID32246266
PMCPMC7190770
OpenAlexW3015184249

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.