ALERT!

This site is not optimized for Internet Explorer 8 (or older).

Please upgrade to a newer version of Internet Explorer or use an alternate browser such as Chrome or Firefox.

Mechanically Expanded Versus Self-Expanding Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Tuesday, January 2, 2018

Submitted by

Mark Ferguson

Source

Source Name: JAMA

Source URL: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/2667721

Author(s)

Ted E. Feldman, Michael J. Reardon, Vivek Rajagopal, Raj R. Makkar, Tanvir K. Bajwa, Neal S. Kleiman, Axel Linke, Dean J. Kereiakes, Ron Waksman, Vinod H. Thourani, Robert C. Stoler, Gregory J. Mishkel, David G. Rizik, Vijay S. Iyer, Thomas G. Gleason, Didier Tchétché, Joshua D. Rovin, Maurice Buchbinder, Ian T. Meredith, Matthias Götberg, Henrik Bjursten, Christopher Meduri, Michael H. Salinger, Dominic J. Allocco, Keith D. Dawkins

The authors compared mechanically expanded TAVR to self-expanding TAVR in a randomized non-inferiority trial. Major adverse events occurred in 20% and 17% of patients, respectively (safety measure). The one-year rates of mortality, stroke, or paravalvular leak for the valves were 15.4% and 25.5%, respectively (effectiveness measure). Mechanically expanded valves are not inferior to self-expanding valves and broaden the options available for high risk patients.