Meta-Analysis of Stroke and Mortality Rates in Patients Undergoing Valve-in-Valve Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Background During the past decade, the use of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) was extended beyond treatment-naive patients and implemented for treatment of degenerated surgical bioprosthetic valves. Selection criteria for either valve-in-valve (viv) TAVR or redo surgical aortic valve replacement are not well established, and decision making on the operative approach still remains challenging for the interdisciplinary heart team. Methods and Results This review was intended to analyze all studies on viv-TAVR focusing on short- and mid-term stroke and mortality rates compared with redo surgical aortic valve replacement or native TAVR procedures. A structured literature search and review process led to 1667 potentially relevant studies on July 1, 2020. Finally, 23 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria for qualitative analysis. All references were case series either with or without propensity score matching and registry analyses. Quantitative synthesis of data from 8509 patients revealed that viv-TAVR is associated with mean 30-day stroke and mortality rates of 2.2% and 4.2%, respectively. Pooled data analysis showed no significant differences in 30-day stroke rate, 30-day mortality, and 1-year mortality between viv-TAVR and comparator treatment (native TAVR [n=11 804 patients] or redo surgical aortic valve replacement [n=498 patients]). Conclusions This review is the first one comparing the risk for stroke and mortality rates in viv-TAVR procedures with native TAVR approach and contributes substantial data for the clinical routine. Moreover, this systematic review is the most comprehensive analysis on ischemic cerebrovascular events and early mortality in patients undergoing viv-TAVR. In this era with increasing numbers of bioprosthetic valves used in younger patients, viv-TAVR is a suitable option for the treatment of degenerated bioprostheses.

Automated summary

This review compares the stroke and mortality rates of valve-in-valve TAVR procedures with native TAVR and provides substantial data for clinical decision-making. The analysis shows no significant differences in short-term and mid-term outcomes between valve-in-valve TAVR and the comparator treatments.