Send to

Choose Destination
N Engl J Med. 2019 May 2;380(18):1695-1705. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1814052. Epub 2019 Mar 16.

Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Replacement with a Balloon-Expandable Valve in Low-Risk Patients.

Author information

From Baylor Scott and White Health, Plano, TX (M.J.M., D.L.B.); Columbia University Irving Medical Center and New York-Presbyterian Hospital (M.B.L., S.K.K., R.T.H., M.C.A., C.R.S.) and New York University Langone Medical Center (M.R.W.) - both in New York; Medstar Heart and Vascular Institute, Georgetown University, Washington, DC (V.H.T.); Cedars-Sinai Heart Institute, Los Angeles (R.M.); Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Rutgers University, New Brunswick (M.R.), and Gagnon Cardiovascular Institute, Morristown Medical Center, Morristown (P.G.) - both in New Jersey; Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland (S.R.K.); Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago (S.C.M.); Saint Luke's Mid America Heart Institute, Kansas City, MO (D.J.C.); Quebec Heart and Lung Institute, Laval University, Quebec, QC (P.P.), and St. Paul's Hospital, University of British Columbia, Vancouver (J.L., P.B., J.G.W.) - both in Canada; University of Washington, Seattle (J.M.M.); Emory University Hospital, Atlanta (V.B.); Lankenau Medical Center, Wynnewood (S.G.), and the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia (W.Y.S.) - both in Pennsylvania; Banner University Medical Center, Phoenix, AZ (A.P.); and the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London (S.J.P.).



Among patients with aortic stenosis who are at intermediate or high risk for death with surgery, major outcomes are similar with transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR) and surgical aortic-valve replacement. There is insufficient evidence regarding the comparison of the two procedures in patients who are at low risk.


We randomly assigned patients with severe aortic stenosis and low surgical risk to undergo either TAVR with transfemoral placement of a balloon-expandable valve or surgery. The primary end point was a composite of death, stroke, or rehospitalization at 1 year. Both noninferiority testing (with a prespecified margin of 6 percentage points) and superiority testing were performed in the as-treated population.


At 71 centers, 1000 patients underwent randomization. The mean age of the patients was 73 years, and the mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk score was 1.9% (with scores ranging from 0 to 100% and higher scores indicating a greater risk of death within 30 days after the procedure). The Kaplan-Meier estimate of the rate of the primary composite end point at 1 year was significantly lower in the TAVR group than in the surgery group (8.5% vs. 15.1%; absolute difference, -6.6 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -10.8 to -2.5; P<0.001 for noninferiority; hazard ratio, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.37 to 0.79; P = 0.001 for superiority). At 30 days, TAVR resulted in a lower rate of stroke than surgery (P = 0.02) and in lower rates of death or stroke (P = 0.01) and new-onset atrial fibrillation (P<0.001). TAVR also resulted in a shorter index hospitalization than surgery (P<0.001) and in a lower risk of a poor treatment outcome (death or a low Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire score) at 30 days (P<0.001). There were no significant between-group differences in major vascular complications, new permanent pacemaker insertions, or moderate or severe paravalvular regurgitation.


Among patients with severe aortic stenosis who were at low surgical risk, the rate of the composite of death, stroke, or rehospitalization at 1 year was significantly lower with TAVR than with surgery. (Funded by Edwards Lifesciences; PARTNER 3 number, NCT02675114.).

[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Atypon
Loading ...
Support Center