SynthesisJournal of the American Heart Association2021
Meta-Analysis of Stroke and Mortality Rates in Patients Undergoing Valve-in-Valve Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.
Synthesis in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Stroke Risk After Bioprosthetic Aortic Valve Replacement in Aortic Stenosis: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Stroke · 2026Pooled it
- Trends in Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement Outcomes in Patients With Low-Surgical Risk: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2024Pooled it
- Meta-Analysis of Stroke and Mortality Rates in Patients Undergoing Valve-in-Valve Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2021Pooled it
- National Trends and In-Hospital Outcomes of Valve-in-Valve Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement With Cerebral Embolic Protection.Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2026Article
- BASILICA Technique: Why, When and How?European cardiology · 2026Review
- Efficacy and Safety of ACURATE neo2 in Valve-in-Valve TAVI: A Prospective Single-Center Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Clinical and subclinical acute brain injury caused by invasive cardiovascular procedures.Nature reviews. Cardiology · 2025Review
- Clinical and hemodynamic outcomes of self-expanding and balloon-expandable valves for valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation (ViV-TAVI): An updated systematic review and meta-analysis.International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature · 2025Review
- What Are SAVR Indications in the TAVI Era?Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Clinical considerations and challenges in TAV-in-TAV procedures.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Review
- Short- and Medium-Term Outcomes Comparison of Native- and Valve-in-Valve TAVI Procedures.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Article
- Article
- Cerebral Embolic Protection in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.Structural heart : the journal of the Heart Team · 2023Review
- Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Special Populations.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Review
- Trans-Catheter Valve-in-Valve Implantation for the Treatment of Aortic Bioprosthetic Valve Failure.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- DOACs in Mechanical and Bioprosthetic Heart Valves: A Narrative Review of Emerging Data and Future Directions.Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/HemostasisReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background During the past decade, the use of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) was extended beyond treatment-naïve patients and implemented for treatment of degenerated surgical bioprosthetic valves. Selection criteria for either valve-in-valve (viv) TAVR or redo surgical aortic valve replacement are not well established, and decision making on the operative approach still remains challenging for the interdisciplinary heart team. Methods and Results This review was intended to analyze all studies on viv-TAVR focusing on short- and mid-term stroke and mortality rates compared with redo surgical aortic valve replacement or native TAVR procedures. A structured literature search and review process led to 1667 potentially relevant studies on July 1, 2020. Finally, 23 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria for qualitative analysis. All references were case series either with or without propensity score matching and registry analyses. Quantitative synthesis of data from 8509 patients revealed that viv-TAVR is associated with mean 30-day stroke and mortality rates of 2.2% and 4.2%, respectively. Pooled data analysis showed no significant differences in 30-day stroke rate, 30-day mortality, and 1-year mortality between viv-TAVR and comparator treatment (native TAVR [n=11 804 patients] or redo surgical aortic valve replacement [n=498 patients]). Conclusions This review is the first one comparing the risk for stroke and mortality rates in viv-TAVR procedures with native TAVR approach and contributes substantial data for the clinical routine. Moreover, this systematic review is the most comprehensive analysis on ischemic cerebrovascular events and early mortality in patients undergoing viv-TAVR. In this era with increasing numbers of bioprosthetic valves used in younger patients, viv-TAVR is a suitable option for the treatment of degenerated bioprostheses.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.