ReviewStructural heart : the journal of the Heart Team2025
Transcatheter Treatment of Bicuspid Aortic Valve Stenosis: From Observational Studies to Randomized Clinical Trials.
Review in Structural heart : the journal of the Heart Team, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement for Severe Bicuspid Aortic Valve Stenosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.JACC. Advances · 2026Article
- Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation/Replacement (TAVI/TAVR): How It Started, How It's Going, and Where It's Going.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) disease is the most common congenital heart abnormality, which affects up to 2% of the population and significantly increases the lifetime risk of aortic stenosis and the need for valve replacement. While surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) remains the standard of care in low surgical-risk patients, transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is increasingly used as a treatment alternative with favorable outcomes in well-selected BAV patients. To date, randomized controlled trials comparing TAVI and SAVR have excluded patients with BAV, except the UK TAVI and the more recent The NOrdic Aortic Valve IntervenTION-2 trial. Of note, in The NOrdic Aortic Valve IntervenTION-2 trial, there was a numerical imbalance in the BAV subgroup, with more events observed in the TAVI group than in the SAVR group for the composite outcome (all-cause mortality, stroke, and rehospitalization) at 1- and 3-year follow-up, although the risk estimates were imprecise due to the limited number of events. The upcoming TraNscatheter Aortic Valve Implantation versus surGical AorTic valvE replacement in patients with Bicuspid aortic valve stenosis (NAVIGATE Bicuspid) and Bicuspid aortic valve replacement: EvaLuatIon of transcathetEr VERsus Surgery (BELIEVERS) trials will directly compare TAVI and SAVR in BAV populations. These trials are designed to provide robust, adequately powered estimates of the comparative safety and effectiveness of both interventions over extended follow-up and are expected to inform future guideline recommendations in the setting of BAV anatomy. This review summarizes current data on the use of TAVI in patients with severe BAV stenosis, evaluates anatomical and procedural complexities, and outlines the design and rationale of upcoming randomized controlled trials addressing this critical knowledge gap.
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.