ArticleClinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society2026
Early safety and efficacy of intra-annular versus supra-annular self-expanding transcatheter heart valves.
Article in Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundComparative data on safety and efficacy of intra- and supra-annular self-expanding heart valves (THV) for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) is scarce. The FIRE TAVI study compared procedural in-hospital and mid-term outcomes of the intra-annular Navitor THV and the supra-annular Evolut PRO THV.
methodsThe retrospective, multicenter study enrolled patients with severe AS who underwent TAVI using Navitor or Evolut PRO. The primary composite safety endpoint included all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, disabling stroke, life-threatening bleeding, major vascular complication, or acute kidney injury requiring dialysis until discharge. Secondary endpoints comprised pacemaker implantation, paravalvular leakage (PVL), and mean transvalvular gradient. Mortality was assessed 381 ± 308 days after TAVI. Multivariable regression analysis was used for endpoint comparison of both THVs.
resultsThen, 269 patients after Navitor and 272 patients after Evolut PRO implantation were enrolled. There was no significant risk difference regarding the adjusted primary safety endpoint (OR 0.97 [95% CI 0.50-1.89]) and rate of pacemaker implantation (OR 1.13 [95% CI 0.67-1.90]). The pressure gradient was comparable between both groups (Navitor 7.0 [4.0-10.0] mmHg vs. Evolut PRO 6.0 [2.0-10.0] mmHg, mean difference - 0.32 [95% CI -0.97-0.32]). Navitor showed a lower frequency of more than mild PVL (0.8% vs. 3.5%, p = 0.032). Mortality was similar (HR 1.04 [95% CI 0.66-1.63]).
conclusionThe implantation of the intra-annular Navitor and the supra-annular Evolut PRO was safe, with severe adverse events occurring at similar rates until discharge. The risk of moderate or severe PVL was lower with Navitor; mid-term mortality was comparable in both groups.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41949623What 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.