ArticleJournal of the American Heart Association2026
Supra-Annular Versus Intra-Annular Devices for Transcatheter Aortic Valve-in-Valve Replacement: The PANDORA International Registry.
Article in Journal of the American Heart Association, 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
22 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAs transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) expands to younger, lower-risk populations, the need for repeat procedures due to valve degeneration is expected to increase. TAVR-in-TAVR has emerged as a feasible strategy, although outcomes across supra-annular (SAV) and intra-annular (IAV) valve combinations remain unclear. The PANDORA (Supra-Annular Versus Intra-Annular Devices for TAVR-in-TAVR) international registry study assessed safety, hemodynamic performance, and clinical outcomes of TAVR-in-TAVR according to prosthetic configurations.
methodsFrom an international multicenter registry (2011-2024), 172 TAVR-in-TAVR cases were identified among ≈30 000 TAVR procedures, with a median interval of 1401 days. Patients were stratified into 4 groups: SAV-IAV (n=32), SAV-SAV (n=29), IAV-SAV (n=74), and IAV-IAV (n=37).
resultsCoreValve/Evolut (49.4%) and Edwards SAPIEN (35.5%) were the most frequent index prostheses, whereas the second valve was mainly Edwards SAPIEN (60.5%), followed by Evolut (35.5%) and Myval/Octacor (4.0%). Structural valve deterioration was the leading failure mechanism (77.9%), while nonstructural valve deterioration dysfunction, alone or combined with structural valve deterioration, occurred in 40.7%. Overall Valve Academic Research Consortium 3 technical success was 91.3%, numerically highest in SAV-IAV and IAV-SAV (
conclusionsTAVR-in-TAVR is feasible with generally favorable outcomes, although clinical and procedural profiles vary by the different prosthesis combinations. These findings highlight the need for further studies to refine device selection strategies.
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.