SynthesisReviews in cardiovascular medicine2026
Supra-Annular Self-Expanding Versus Intra-Annular Balloon-Expandable Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: A Meta-Analysis of Valve-Related Outcomes.
Synthesis in Reviews in cardiovascular medicine, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is an established treatment for severe aortic stenosis. The two most widely used platforms are either balloon-expandable intra-annular valve (BEV, Edwards) or self-expanding supra-annular valve (SEV) from Medtronic. Comparative data related to clinical and sub-clinical valve thrombosis are limited. The aim of this study-level meta-analysis is to evaluate its incidence and whether this translates into any difference in clinical outcomes. Methods: Electronic databases were searched from inception through to October 2025 to identify randomised clinical trials of patients receiving either platform. Rates of clinical and subclinical valve thrombosis were identified and compared between the two groups. Results: In five randomized controlled trials including 1877 patients, the risk of clinical and sub-clinical valve thrombosis was relatively low in both groups. There was a significant 81% reduction in clinical valve thrombosis in patients undergoing SEV compared to BEV [0.4% vs. 2.1%; rate ratio (RR) 0.19, 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.04 to 0.86), Conclusion: Patients undergoing TAVI using SEV compared to BEV have a lower risk of clinical and sub-clinical valve thrombosis in randomized trials, which is largely influenced by small annulus anatomy. Larger studies with longer term follow-up or using a dedicated imaging protocol may provide better insights into the clinical sequelae of this phenomenon.
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.