Objective: We studied the impact of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) compared to the surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) on 30-day and one-year mortality from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in patients with severe aortic stenosis at high or low-intermediate surgical risk.
Materials and methods: All RCTs were retrieved through PubMed computerized database and the site https://www.clinicaltrials.gov from January 2010 until March 31st, 2019. The absolute risk reduction (RD) with the 95% confidence interval (CI) was used to assess the effectiveness of the intervention under comparison. We evaluated overall mortality rates at 30-day and one-year follow-up in the comparison between TAVI vs. SAVR. We also evaluated the role played by the site access for TAVI performed through the femoral or subclavian artery (TV-TAVI) vs. SAVR, or transapically (TA-TAVI) vs. SAVR.
Results: In the "as-treated population" the overall 30-day mortality was significantly lower in TAVI (p=0.03) with respect to SAVR. However, the analysis for TAVI subgroups showed that 30-day mortality was (1) significantly lower in TV-TAVI vs. SAVR (p=0.006), (2) increased, not significantly, in TA-TAVI vs. SAVR (p=0.62). No significant differences were found between TAVI vs. SAVR at one-year follow-up.
Conclusions: The results of our meta-analysis suggest that TV-TAVI is a powerful tool in the treatment of severe aortic stenosis at high or low-intermediate surgical risk, with a significant lower mortality with respect to SAVR. On the contrary, SAVR seems to provide better results than TA-TAVI.