Comparative Outcomes of Surgical and Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Meta-analysis and Parametric Extrapolation of Clinical Trials

Abstract

IntroductionWe aimed to pool randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) with transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and extrapolate pooled time-to-event data to compare long-term outcomes. MethodsAn electronic database search was performed for RCTs comparing SAVR with TAVR. The most current longest follow-up data for each RCT were included. Data were pooled using a random-effects model. Survival data were pooled for Kaplan–Meier analysis as well as parametric modeling with extrapolation. ResultsSeven RCTs comprising 7774 patients were included. Mean valve gradient at 5 y was comparable between SAVR [11 mmHg (3.7; 18.3)] and TAVR [8.1 mmHg (1.9; 14.3)] (P = 0.38). TAVR had a higher mean valve area at 30 d, 1 y, and 2 y [1.68 cm2 (1.22; 2.13) versus 1.8 cm2 (1.35; 2.25), P = 0.02]. SAVR had a higher freedom from any paravalvular leak at 30 d and 1 y [86% (81; 90) versus 39% (36; 41), P < 0.01]. All-cause death was lower in the SAVR group at 5 y [39% (29; 50) versus 43% (31; 57), P < 0.01]. Although no differences were seen between SAVR and TAVR in the pooled Kaplan–Meier analysis of all-cause mortality and composite of all-cause mortality or stroke, parametric modeling with extrapolation showed significant divergence for both outcomes. ConclusionsPooled all-cause mortality as well as pooled composite of all-cause mortality or stroke indicated better survival with SAVR at 5 y. Long-term parametric extrapolation also indicated superior survival with SAVR.