ReviewJournal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions2024
Long-Term Outcomes of Transcatheter vs Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement: Meta-analysis of Randomized Trials.
Review in Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Stroke Risk After Bioprosthetic Aortic Valve Replacement in Aortic Stenosis: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Stroke · 2026Pooled it
- Examining short-term and long-term outcomes in octogenarians undergoing isolated surgical aortic valve replacement.Journal of geriatric cardiology : JGC · 2026Article
- Clinical Outcomes of Transcatheter Versus Surgical Management of Coronary Artery Disease and Aortic Stenosis.Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions · 2026Article
- Right anterior mini-thoracotomy for isolated aortic valve replacement: An international and multicenter study.JTCVS open · 2026Article
- Review
- In-hospital outcomes of non-elective transapical transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Advances in Clinical Cardiology 2024: A Summary of Key Clinical Trials.Advances in therapy · 2025Review
- Outcomes and Cost-Effectiveness of Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients with and Without Coronary Artery Disease.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2025Article
- Isolated Rapid Deployment Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients with Aortic Stenosis: Single-Center Retrospective Study.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2025Article
- Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Reverses Heyde Syndrome: A Case Report of Severe Aortic Stenosis and Gastrointestinal Bleeding.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation and Replacement: The Latest Advances and Prospects.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: We aimed to perform a meta-analysis of randomized trials comparing long-term outcomes of patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) vs surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for severe aortic stenosis. The short-term efficacy and safety of TAVR are proven, but long-term outcomes are unclear. Methods: We included randomized controlled trials comparing TAVR vs SAVR at the longest available follow-up. The primary end point was death or disabling stroke. Secondary end points were all-cause mortality, cardiac mortality, stroke, pacemaker implantation, valve thrombosis, valve gradients, and moderate-to-severe paravalvular leaks. The study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023481856). Results: Seven trials (N = 7785 patients) were included. Weighted mean trial follow-up was 5.76 ± 0.073 years. Overall, no significant difference in death or disabling stroke was observed with TAVR vs SAVR (HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.93-1.11; Conclusions: In severe aortic stenosis, the long-term mortality or disabling stroke risk of TAVR is similar to SAVR, but with higher risk of pacemaker implantation, especially with self-expanding valves. As compared with SAVR, the relative reduction in death or stroke risk and valve thrombosis was greater with self-expanding than with balloon-expandable valves.
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.