Virtual ACC 2020 | PARTNER 3: TAVR vs CABG in Low Risk at 2 Years

The 2-year outcomes in patients with severe aortic stenosis and low surgical risk continue to show a numerical benefit in favor of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) vs. surgical replacement (CABG) for the primary end point of death, stroke or repeat hospitalization for cardiovascular reasons. However, the initially higher advantage of TAVR has been narrowing down because of an uptick in deaths and strokes. 

When the PARTNER 3 was presented just one year ago for the same ACC event, the difference between these treatments was 7.1%, which was enough to show not just non-inferiority of TAVR vs. CABG, but also superiority. After the virtual presentation of the PARTNER 3 2-year outcomes at the virtual ACC 2020, we observe the difference between both treatments has shrunk to 5.9%, which is still enough to show non-inferiority.

Whether the curves will keep separate, even by a small margin, or not, they continue to follow this trend and end up crossing at some point, this is mere speculation, according to M. Mack himself, who presented the outcomes. 

The PARTNER 3 included 1000 patients with an STS of 4% or lower (mean STS 1.9%) treated with the balloon expandable Sapien 3 or CABG in 71 different centers. 


Read also: Virtual ACC 2020 | Antidote for Life-Threatening Bleeding with New Anticoagulant Agents.


At 2 years, TAVR maintains its difference compared against CABG for the combined end point (11.5% vs 17.4%; HR 0.63, 0.45 to 0.88) but not for the individual components (except for repeat hospitalizations).

The main reason behind rehospitalizations in both groups was cardiac failure.

The TAVR group presented a lower incidence of atrial fibrillation (7.9% vs 41.8%) and more new left bundle branch block (24.4% vs 9.4%; p<0.001). Valve thrombosis (VARC 2 definition) was more frequent in the TAVR group (2.6% vs 0.7%; p=0.02).

The echo test at 2 years did not show changes in mean gradient compared to prior levels (13.6 vs 11.8 mmHg; p<0.001), valve area (1.7 vs 1.7 cm2; p=0.69) or paravalvular regurgitation (p<0.001). 

Original Title: Two-year clinical and echocardiographic outcomes from the PARTNER 3 low-risk randomized trial.

Reference: Mack MJ et al. Presentado en forma virtual en el ACC 2020.


Subscribe to our weekly newsletter

Get the latest scientific articles on interventional cardiology

We are interested in your opinion. Please, leave your comments, thoughts, questions, etc., below. They will be most welcome.

More articles by this author

Is it really necessary to monitor all patients after TAVR?

Conduction disorders (CD) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are a frequent complication and may lead to the need for permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI)....

Is it really necessary to monitor all patients after TAVR?

Conduction disorders (CD) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are a frequent complication and may lead to the need for permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI)....

Transradial Aortic Valvuloplasty: Is Minimalism Worth It?

Balloon aortic valvuloplasty (BAV) has historically been used either as a bridge strategy, an assessment tool, or even palliative treatment in severe aortic stenosis...

TCT 2025 | SUMMIT-MAC: Transcatheter Mitral Valve Replacement with the Tendyne System in Patients with Severe Annular Calcification

The prospective, multicenter SUMMIT-MAC study evaluated the safety and efficacy of transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR) using the Tendyne system in patients with severe...

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related Articles

SOLACI Sessionsspot_img

Recent Articles

Coronary Perforations and Use of Covered Stents: Safe and Effective Long-Term Strategy?

Coronary perforations remain one of the most serious complications of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), especially in cases of Ellis ruptures type III. In these...

Is it really necessary to monitor all patients after TAVR?

Conduction disorders (CD) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are a frequent complication and may lead to the need for permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI)....

Is it really necessary to monitor all patients after TAVR?

Conduction disorders (CD) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are a frequent complication and may lead to the need for permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI)....