A prospective, non-randomized comparison of SAPIEN XT and CoreValve implantation in two sequential cohorts of patients with severe aortic stenosis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES: Few data is available comparing Edwards SAPIEN XT - SXT (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, California) with Medtronic CoreValve - CoV (Medtronic Inc., Minneapolis, Minnesota) in patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). METHODS: We selected consecutive patients undergoing transfemoral TAVR with SXT or CoV at our Institution. Main outcomes were Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC)-combined safety endpoints. RESULTS: A total of 100 patients (SXT, n=50 versus CoV, n=50) were analyzed. Both SXT and CoV showed good device success rates (98% versus 90%, p=0.20). SXT versus CoV reduced the occurrence of paravalvular regurgitation after TAVR (26% versus 90%, p<0.0001) though not affecting the rate of moderate/severe regurgitation (p=0.20). SXT versus CoV required less frequently a permanent pacemaker after TAVR (8% versus 38%, p<0.0001). In-hospital major vascular complications (8% versus 4%, p>0.99), life-threatening bleedings (2% versus 4%, p>0.99), stroke (4% versus 6%, p>0.99) and death (6% versus 2%, p>0.99) did not differ between SXT and CoV. However, safety endpoints favored SXT (17% versus 34.6%, p=0.01), due to a numerically higher incidence of ischemic stroke and Acute Kidney Injury Stage 3 after CoV. At multivariate analysis, TAVR with SXT (odds ratio=0.21, 95% confidence intervals [0.05-0.84], p=0.03) was predictive of fewer adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Transcatheter valve implantation with Edwards SAPIEN XT was associated with lower VARC-combined safety endpoints as compared with Medtronic CoreValve. More extensive cohorts are needed to confirm these results.
SUBMITTER: Kasel AM
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4082233 | biostudies-other | 2014
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
ACCESS DATA