ArticleCatheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions2026
Intra-Annular Versus Supra-Annular Self-Expanding Valves for Valve-in-Valve TAVR.
Article in Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA limitation of Valve-in-Valve (VIV) transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM), which is associated with worse quality of life and heart failure hospitalizations. As such, strategies to avoid PPM are desired. We compared the clinical and hemodynamic results of VIV TAVR with intra-annular self-expanding valves (IA SEV, Navitor, Abbott Vascular) versus supra-annular self-expanding valves (SA SEV, Evolut, Medtronic).
aimsTo evaluate the hemodynamics and clinical outcomes of self-expanding valve platforms for VIV TAVR.
methodsPatients were treated at two sites. The primary endpoint was the 30-day mean transvalvular gradient. Secondary endpoints included 30-day effective orifice area (EOA); and key clinical events including major vascular complication, coronary obstruction, 30-day all-cause mortality, stroke, need for reintervention, and new requirement of permanent pacemaker. A linear effects model was fit to adjust for factors related to PPM including surgical valve true inner dimension (TID), balloon post-dilation, body surface area, and etiology of surgical valve failure.
resultsConsecutive patients who underwent VIV TAVR with IA SEV (n = 48) and SA SEV (n = 52) are reported; 42% were women, the mean age was 79.2 ± 6.7 years, and the mean STS Predicted Risk of Mortality was 6.0 ± 4.1%. The mean surgical valve TID was 21.5 ± 1.5 mm. At 30 days, there was no difference in mean transvalvular gradient in IA SEV (10.6 ± 3.6 mmHg) and SA SEV (12.3 ± 6.9, p = 0.44). EOA was slightly larger in IA SEV (1.69 ± 0.6 cm
conclusionsVIV TAVR using an IA SEV was safe in this case series with no difference in hemodynamics between IA SEV and SA SEV. These findings provide support for prospective evaluations of an IA SEV for VIV TAVR.
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.