EuroPCR 2024 | NOTION-2: TAVI vs SAVR, Randomized Study on Low-Risk Young Patients with Severe Tricuspid Disease or Bicuspid Stenosis

Many of the studies comparing TAVR against SAVR in low risk patients included patients between 70-75 years, excluding those with tricuspid valves. 

EuroPCR 2024

This study included low surgical risk patients with severe aortic stenosis and symptoms, 75 years or younger. Participants were randomized 1:1 to receiving TAVR or SAVR, stratified according to sex, need for new revascularization and presence of bicuspid or tricuspid valves. 

Primary end point at one year was a composite of death, stroke, or rehospitalization (procedure, cardiac failure or valve failure related). Secondary end points included death or disabling stroke, major bleeding, new atrial fibrillation, need for pacemaker implantation, aortic valve performance (gradient and paravalvular leak) and functional parameters such as functional class.

370 patients were enrolled, mean age 71.1 years, average STS 1.1, and 26% had bicuspid valves (mainly type 1). Primary end point showed a non-significant difference in events (with higher trend in TAVR) (10.2% vs 7.1%; HR 1.4, CI 95% 0.7-2.9; P=0.3). Neither were there significant differences in death and disabling stroke (3.2% vs 1.6%; HR 2.0, CI 95% 0.5-7.8; P=0.3).

Read also: EuroPCR 2024 | CALIPSO: CTO vs Angiography Guided Treatment of Calcified Lesions.

As regards secondary end points, TAVR patients showed lower bleeding (HR 0.3; P≤0.001), lower incidence of atrial fibrillation (HR 0.1; P≤0.001) and less mismatch (HR 0.5; P=0.02), but showed higher rates of pacemaker implantation (HR 2; P=0.03) and paravalvular leak (P=0.005).

Bicuspid valve patient sub-analysis revealed a significant increase in primary end point incidence (14.3% vs 3.9%; HR 3.8, CI 95% 1.8-18.5; P=0.07). When looking at individual end points, SAVR presented fewer events. 

The authors have concluded that TAVR and SAVR are equivalent in young patients when it comes to the composite event. However, results were less favorable for TAVR in patients with bicuspid valves. 

Dr. Omar Tupayachi

Dr. Omar Tupayachi.
Member of the Editorial Board of SOLACI.org.

Reference: Presented by Ole De Backer at Late-Breaking Clinical Trials, EuroPCR 2024, May 14-17, Paris, France.


Subscribe to our weekly newsletter

Get the latest scientific articles on interventional cardiology

More articles by this author

Contemporary Challenges in Left Atrial Appendage Closure: Updated Approach to Device Embolization

Even though percutaneous left atrial appendage (LAA) closure is generally safe, device embolization – with 0 to 1.5% global incidence – is still a...

Cardiac Remodeling After Percutaneous ASD Closure: Should It Be Immediate or Progressive?

Atrial septal defect (ASD) is a common congenital heart disease that generates a left-to-right shunt, leading to right-side chamber overload and a risk of...

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)....

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related Articles

SOLACI Sessionsspot_img

Recent Articles

COILSEAL: Use of Coils in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention, Useful for Complication Management?

The use of coils as vascular closing tool has been steadily expanding beyond its traditional role in neuroradiology into coronary territory, where it remains...

Treatment of In-Stent Restenosis in Small Vessels with Paclitaxel-Coated Balloons

Coronary artery disease (CAD) in smaller epicardial vessels occurs in 30% to 67% of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention and poses particular technical challenges....

Contemporary Challenges in Left Atrial Appendage Closure: Updated Approach to Device Embolization

Even though percutaneous left atrial appendage (LAA) closure is generally safe, device embolization – with 0 to 1.5% global incidence – is still a...