Keywords: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) aortic stenosis surgical risk surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) However, there appears to be a significant reduction in risk of acute renal failure at the expense of an increased risk of requiring a permanent pacemaker in low and intermediate risk patients undergoing TAVR compared to SAVR.

Ĭonclusions: We conclude that in intermediate risk patients undergoing aortic valve replacement, the risk of mortality, neurological outcomes, and MI do not appear to be significantly different between TAVR and SAVR. A statistically significant decrease in risk of post-procedural acute renal failure in the TAVR group was observed, but so was a significantly higher rate of pacemaker implantations for the TAVR group. A trend towards benefit with TAVR was noted in terms of neurological events and myocardial infarction (MI) without statistical significance. Results: Analysis of the TAVR and SAVR cohorts revealed no significant differences in the outcomes of 30-day or 1-year mortality. We limited our meta-analysis to studies matching patient populations by propensity scores or randomization and examined clinical outcomes between TAVR and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). Methods: A Medline search was conducted using standard methodology to search for clinical trials and observational studies including intermediate risk patients. Other smaller studies including lower risk patients have been conducted, but further meta-analysis of these studies is required to draw more broad comparisons. Prospective studies examining the benefits of TAVR in intermediate risk patients are ongoing. Background: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has been approved in patients with high or prohibited surgical risk for surgery for treatment of severe symptomatic aortic stenosis.

Total Registry 0.9.7.5 free downloads