AI Article Synopsis

  • The Medtronic Evolut Pro valve (EPV) is a new self-expanding valve aimed at reducing paravalvular leak (PVL) rates in transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).
  • A study analyzed data from 2591 patients, comparing EPV with older-generation valves (CoreValve and Evolut R), focusing on postprocedural PVL and permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation rates.
  • Results showed that EPV had significantly lower moderate and above PVL rates compared to CoreValve and a reduced need for PPM implantation compared to both CoreValve and Evolut R, highlighting its safety and efficacy.

Article Abstract

Background: The Medtronic Evolut Pro valve (EPV) is a new-generation self-expanding valve (SEV), particularly designed to reduce paravalvular leak (PVL) rates in transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). We aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of EPV with older-generation SEVs, in particular, postprocedural PVL and permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation rates.

Methods: We performed a retrospective, multicenter, propensity-matched analysis of the Israeli TAVR registry between September 2008 and June 2019. Two independent propensity score-matched comparisons were performed comparing EPV with the first-generation CoreValve (CV), and comparing EPV with the second-generation Evolut R valve (ERV).

Results: The registry included 2591 patients who were propensity-matched into 3 cohorts: EPV (n = 222), CV (n = 212), and ERV (n = 213). Moderate and above PVL rates were lower for EPV (angiographic PVL [aPVL], 0.6%; echocardiographic PVL [ePVL], 3.0%) as compared with CV (aPVL, 7.8% [P<.001] and ePVL, 11.6% [P<.01]), but not as compared with ERV (aPVL, 6.4% [P<.01] and ePVL, 4.4% [P=.57]). Lower rates of PPM were noted for EPV (16.3%) as compared with both CV (33.5%; P<.001) and ERV (24.4%; hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% confidence interval, 0.37-0.995; P=.046). Other safety and efficacy outcome rates were excellent, with significant improvements as compared with older-generation SEVs.

Conclusions: The EPV demonstrates excellent procedural safety and efficacy outcomes. Moderate and above PVL rates were significantly reduced in comparison with CV; however, not significantly reduced as compared with ERV. The need for PPM implantation was lower as compared with both older-generation valves.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.25270/jic/21.00203DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

transcatheter aortic
8
aortic valve
8
valve replacement
8
pvl rates
8
comparing epv
8
epv
6
valve
5
pvl
5
generational differences
4
differences outcomes
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!