These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
Pubmed for Handhelds
PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS
Search MEDLINE/PubMed
Title: Performance of the Evolut-R 34 mm versus Sapien-3 29 mm in Transcatheter aortic valve replacement patients with larger annuli: Early outcome results of Evolut-R 34 mm as compared with Sapien-3 29 mm in patients with Annuli ≥26 mm. Author: Eitan A, Witt J, Stripling J, Haselbach T, Rieß FC, Schofer J. Journal: Catheter Cardiovasc Interv; 2018 Dec 01; 92(7):1374-1379. PubMed ID: 29521464. Abstract: BACKGROUND: Evolut-R 34 mm (received CE mark in January 2017) and Sapien-3 29 mm are the only options for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in patients with annulus ≥26 mm. We compared the short-term outcomes of these valves in these patients. METHODS: Data was collected prospectively from consecutive patients with severe aortic stenosis and annulus diameter larger than 26 mm treated by femoral approach TAVR. RESULTS: Between February 1, 2014 to August 19, 2017 Sapien-3 29 mm was implanted in 55 and Evolut-R 34 mm in 37 consecutive patients. Device success rate was 98.2% and 97.3% (P = 1.0) and the composite peri-procedural complication rate was 7.3% and 2.7% (P = .645) in Sapin-3 29 mm and Evolut-R 34 mm, respectively. Composite endpoint of early safety in-hospital did not differ significantly [5(9.2%) vs 3(8.1%), P = 1.00], respectively. Prosthetic valve Gradients were significantly lower with Evolut-R 34 mm [maximal (18.0 ± 5.8 vs 11.2 ± 4.8 mmHg, P < .001) and mean (10.0 ± 3.3 vs 6.3 ± 2.7 mmHg, P < .001)]. Pacemaker implantation rate was high in both groups, and numerically but not statistically significant higher with Evolut-R [10/50 (20.0%) vs 8/28 (28.6%), P = .389]. CONCLUSIONS: As compared to Sapien-3 29 mm the Evolut-R 34 mm is a real alternative for TAVR in patients with a large annulus with a comparable peri-procedural complication rate, better hemodynamic results but a trend for higher pacemaker rate.[Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]