Meta-Analysis Comparing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation With Balloon Versus Self-Expandable Valves

Two transcatheter aortic valve systems are currently in use in the United States; balloon-expandable valves (BEV) and the self-expanding valve (SEV). However, comparative data outcomes between the 2 systems are limited, as only one randomized trial (RCT) performed a head-to-head comparison between BEVs and SEVs. However, there are several RCTs comparing BEV or SEV to surgical valve replacement. In this analysis, we used Bayesian network meta-analysis techniques to compare BEVs and SEVs. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at maximum follow-up. Secondary outcomes were cardiovascular mortality, stroke, pacemaker implantation, reintervention, heart failure hospitalization, and moderate-severe paravalvular leak (PVL.). Eight RCTs with 8,095 patients were included. With the exception of less pacemaker implantation in BEV versus SEV (odds ratio [OR] 0.29, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.11 to 0.77, I² = 51%), there was no difference between BEV and SEV in 30-day outcomes. During long-term follow-up (mean 3 ± 2 years); there was no difference between BEV and SEV in all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 1.1, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.5, I² = 19.6%), cardiovascular mortality (HR 1.1, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.6, I² = 18.5%), stroke (HR 1.3, 95% CI 0.73 to 2.1, I² = 16.9%), hospitalization (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.6, I² = 62%), and reintervention (HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.2 to 2.3, I² = 62%). New pacemaker implantation and PVL were significantly less in BEV group (HR 0.45, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.80, I² = 38.2%), and (HR 0.03, 95% CI 0.0004 to 0.28, I² = 79%), respectively. In conclusion, similar outcomes were seen following transcatheter aortic valve implantation with BEV and SEV with the exception of higher rates of pacemaker implantation and PVL in SEV group.