ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2023
Redo Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement versus Valve-In-Valve Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: A Systematic Review and Reconstructed Time-To-Event Meta-Analysis.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.
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
19 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical impact of initial surgical aortic bioprosthetic valve size on mid-term outcomes of transcatheter valve-in-valve in Japanese patients.General thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2026Article
- Comparative analysis of postoperative outcomes and utilization trends for valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation versus reoperative surgical aortic valve replacement.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2026Article
- Current Trends and Future Challenges in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (TAVI): A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Comparing short- and long-term outcomes of transcatheter valve-in-valve versus redo surgical aortic valve replacement: a literature review.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2026Review
- Reintervention for Failed Aortic Bioprostheses: Distinct Patient Profiles for Redo Surgery and Valve-in-Valve TAVR in an All-Comers Cohort.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Successful Aortic Valve Replacement After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (TAVI) Following Initial Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement (SAVR): A Case Report.The American journal of case reports · 2025Article
- Redo aortic valve replacement with the Perceval valve: the ideal stepping stone in the lifetime management of aortic stenosis?Kardiochirurgia i torakochirurgia polska = Polish journal of cardio-thoracic surgery · 2025Article
- Objective analysis of frailty-based 10-year outcomes of transcatheter and surgical aortic valve replacement.JTCVS structural and endovascular · 2025Article
- Four-Step Framework for Valve-in-Valve Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement for Failed Surgical and Transcatheter Aortic Bioprostheses.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Review
- The TAVI Dilemma: Balloon-Expandable or Self-Expanding Transcatheter Heart Valve-Interpreting Current Evidence for Personalized Valve Selection.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- SAVR and TAVI comparison across the globe based on current regional registry evidence - A meta-analysis of reconstructed time-to-event data.International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature · 2025Article
- Virtual reality for pre-procedural planning of valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation.European heart journal. Digital health · 2025Article
- Short- and mid-term outcomes after redo surgical valve replacement.European journal of medical research · 2025Article
- The Essential Aortic Valve-in-Valve Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Update: Procedural Strategies and Current Clinical Results.Structural heart : the journal of the Heart Team · 2025Review
- Valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) leads to lower device success compared to TAVR in native stenosis.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Article
- Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement for Failed Surgical or Transcatheter Bioprosthetic Valves: A Comprehensive Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Sutureless Biological Aortic Valve Replacement (Su-AVR) in Redo operations: a retrospective real-world experience report of clinical and echocardiographic outcomes.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2024Article
- Sutureless Aortic Valve Prosthesis in Redo Procedures: Single-Center Experience.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Article
- Late consequences of masked bioprosthetic valve endocarditis: diagnostic and treatment options.Kardiochirurgia i torakochirurgia polska = Polish journal of cardio-thoracic surgery · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective. Valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation (ViV-TAVI) has emerged as a useful alternative intervention to redo-surgical aortic valve replacement (Redo-SVAR) for the treatment of degenerated bioprosthesis valve. However, there is no robust evidence about the long-term outcome of both treatments. The aim of this meta-analysis was to analyze the long-term outcomes of Redo-SVAR versus ViV-TAVI by reconstructing the time-to-event data. Methods. The search strategy consisted of a comprehensive review of relevant studies published between 1 January 2000 and 30 September 2022 in three electronic databases, PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and EMBASE. Relevant studies were retrieved for the analysis. The primary endpoint was the long-term mortality for all death. The comparisons were made by the Cox regression model and by landmark analysis and a fully parametric model. A random-effect method was applied to perform the meta-analysis. Results. Twelve studies fulfilled the eligibility criteria and were included in the final analysis. A total of 3547 patients were included. Redo-SAVR group included 1783 patients, and ViV-TAVI included 1764 subjects. Redo-SAVR showed a higher incidence of all-cause mortality within 30-days [Hazard ratio (HR) 2.12; 95% CI = 1.49−3.03; p < 0.0001)], whereas no difference was observed between 30 days and 1 year (HR = 1.03; 95% CI = 0.78−1.33; p = 0.92). From one year, Redo-SAVR showed a longer benefit (HR = 0.52; 95% CI = 0.40−0.67; p < 0.0001). These results were confirmed for cardiovascular death (HR = 2.04; 95% CI = 1.29−3.22; p = 0.001 within one month from intervention; HR = 0.35; 95% CI = 0.18−0.71; p = 0.003 at 4-years follow-up). Conclusions. Although the long-term outcomes seem similar between Redo-SAVR and ViV-TAVI at a five-year follow-up, ViV-TAVI shows significative lower mortality within 30 days. This advantage disappeared between 30 days and 1 year and reversed in favor of redo-SAVR 1 year after the intervention.
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.