TCT 2020 | Surprising Differences in Stroke between SAPIEN 3 and Evolut R

One-year outcomes of the head to head trial between CoreValve Evolut R vs Sapien 3 showed a significantly higher difference in stroke vs. patients receiving the self-expanding valve (Sapien 3 6.9% vs Evolut R 1%; p=0.002).

The SOLVE-TAVI randomized 2×2 patients with severe aortic stenosis and high surgical risk to Sapien 3 or Evolut R and general anesthesia or conscious sedation. 

Both devices resulted comparable for the combined end point of death, stroke, moderate to severe aortic regurgitation and the need of new definite pacemaker

The difference in stroke is surprising and difficult to explain since the number observed in this study for the Sapien 3 greatly exceeds the one observed in other studies, such as the SOURCE 3 and the PARTNER 3, which had used the same device. 

Between 30 days and one year there were no significant differences in stroke, therefore they were peri-procedural strokes. 


Read also: TCT 2020 | Fewer Symptoms and Events when Optimizing with iFR.


All-cause mortality resulted practically identical (17.6% with Evolut R vs 17.0% with Sapien 3; p=0.88), moderate to severe aortic regurgitation rate favored the Sapien 3 numerically, but not significantly (7.0% with Evolut R vs 4.5% with Sapien 3; p=0.35).

Definite pacemaker rate was relatively high and similar between devices (24.7% with Evolut R vs 20.2% with Sapien 3; p=0.25).

As regards the comparison between conscious sedation and general anesthesia, mortality, stroke, MI, infection, and kidney injury rates were equivalent between strategies. 


Read also: TCT 2020 | The Myth of Biodegradable Polymers Seems to Have Come to an End.


Conscious sedation saw shorter intensive care unit stay and shorter total hospital stay. A cost analysis that should favor conscious sedation is expected. 

Original Title: SOLVE-TAVI investigators. A 2 x 2 randomized trial of self-expandable vs balloon-expandable valves and general vs local anesthesia in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation: 1-year result.

Reference: presentado por Feistritzer H-J en el congreso TCT 2020 virtual.


Subscribe to our weekly newsletter

Get the latest scientific articles on interventional cardiology

More articles by this author

TCT 2024 – ACCESS-TAVI: Comparing Percutaneous Access Closure Strategies After TAVI

Vascular access complications following transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) remain common. However, few studies compare vascular access closure methods.  Based on the CHOICE-CLOSURE and MASH...

TAVR in Young Low-Risk Patients

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has established itself as an effective strategy for the treatment of severe aortic stenosis across different risk groups. While previous...

TAVR and Atrial Fibrillation: What Anticoagulants Should We Use?

The prevalence of atrial fibrillation (AF) in TAVR patients ranges from 15 to 30%, depending on series. This arrhythmia has been associated to higher...

Impact of Iliofemoral Disease on Post TAVR Clinical Outcomes: HOSTILE Score Validation

At present, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has been shown safe and effective for treating severe symptomatic aortic stenosis in high-surgical-risk patients. Moreover, its...

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related Articles

SOLACI Sessionsspot_img

Recent Articles

TCT 2024 | FAVOR III EUROPA

The study FAVOR III EUROPA, a randomized trial, included 2,000 patients with chronic coronary syndrome, or stabilized acute coronary syndrome, and intermediate lesions. 1,008...

TCT 2024 | TRISCEND II

This randomized study included 400 patients; 267 were treated with EVOQUE valve and 133 with optimal medical treatment (OMT). After one-year follow-up, there were no...

TCT 2024 – ACCESS-TAVI: Comparing Percutaneous Access Closure Strategies After TAVI

Vascular access complications following transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) remain common. However, few studies compare vascular access closure methods.  Based on the CHOICE-CLOSURE and MASH...