Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41196804›Full record

SynthesisBrazilian journal of cardiovascular surgery2026

Mid-term Outcomes of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement vs. Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Low-to-Moderate Risk Patients with Severe Aortic Stenosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Capela António Dicazeco Pascoal, Hilária Saugo Faria, Antonino de Jesus Francisco, Clara de Andrade Pontual Peres, Luiz Fernando Tavares, Barbara Bombassaro Masiero, Mohamed Doma, Valdano Manuel

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Brazilian journal of cardiovascular surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. 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

8 authors.

Capela António Dicazeco PascoalUniversidade Agostinho Neto Department of Medicine Luanda Angola Department of Medicine, Universidade Agostinho Neto, Luanda, Angola.
Hilária Saugo FariaUniversidade Federal de Santa Maria Escola de Medicina Santa Maria Rio Grande do Sul Brazil Escola de Medicina, Universidade Federal de Santa Maria, Santa Maria, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil.
Antonino de Jesus FranciscoUniversidade Agostinho Neto Department of Medicine Luanda Angola Department of Medicine, Universidade Agostinho Neto, Luanda, Angola.
Clara de Andrade Pontual PeresUniversidade de Pernambuco Department of Medicine Recife Pernambuco Brazil Department of Medicine, Universidade de Pernambuco, Recife, Pernambuco, Brazil.
Luiz Fernando TavaresUniversidade Federal de Alfenas Department of Medicine Alfenas Minas Gerais Brazil Department of Medicine, Universidade Federal de Alfenas, Alfenas, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Barbara Bombassaro MasieroPontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul Department of Medicine Porto Alegre Rio Grande do Sul Brazil Department of Medicine, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil.
Mohamed DomaAlexandria Faculty of Medicine Alexandria Egypt Alexandria Faculty of Medicine, Alexandria, Egypt.
Valdano ManuelComplexo Hospitalar de Doenças Cardio-Pulmonares Cardeal Dom Alexandre do Nascimento Luanda Angola Complexo Hospitalar de Doenças Cardio-Pulmonares Cardeal Dom Alexandre do Nascimento, Luanda, Angola.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionSeveral clinical trials have demonstrated the non-inferiority of transcatheter aortic valve replacement compared with surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with severe aortic stenosis and low to intermediate surgical risk. However, mid-term results are still contentious. We performed this meta-analysis to compare the safety and efficacy of transcatheter vs. surgical aortic valve replacement in the mid-term in patients with aortic stenosis at low to moderate surgical risk.

methodsWe searched Embase, PubMed®, and Cochrane databases for randomized clinical trials that compared transcatheter with surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis with a follow-up of at least four years. Outcomes of interest were all-cause mortality and disabling stroke.

resultsWe included six randomized clinical trials encompassing 6,444 patients with severe aortic stenosis, of whom 3,282 (50.9%) underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement. There was no difference in all-cause mortality (risk ratio [RR] 1.08; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.94 - 1.25; P = 0.30) and disabling stroke (RR 0.95; 95% CI 0.75 - 1.21; P = 0.67) between groups. In the subgroup analysis, five-year mortality (RR 1.28; 95% CI 1.10 - 1.49) was higher in the transcatheter group. The new pacemaker implantation (RR 2.22; 95% CI 1.42 - 3.45) rate was higher in the transcatheter group. However, the new atrial fibrillation (RR 0.40; 95% CI 0.31 - 0.52) rate was higher in the surgical group.

conclusionMid-term mortality and disabling stroke rates in patients with severe aortic stenosis treated with either transcatheter or surgical aortic valve replacement were similar.

Indexed as

Aortic ValveAortic Valve StenosisHeart Valve Prosthesis ImplantationTranscatheter Aortic Valve ReplacementHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRisk FactorsSeverity of Illness IndexStrokeTreatment OutcomeAortic StenosisArtificial PacemakerAtrial FibrillationStrokeTranscatheter Replacement

Identifiers

PMID41196804
PMCPMC12599829

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.