Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Low-Risk Bicuspid and Tricuspid Patients: Meta-Analysis

BackgroundMost pivotal transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) trials have excluded patients with bicuspid aortic stenosis (AS). This study compared TAVR in low-risk patients with bicuspid AS to those with tricuspid AS, incorporating data from prospective trials.MethodsWe selected prospective US low-risk TAVR trials containing a bicuspid arm for this meta-analysis, examining outcomes at 30 days. Study results were pooled using a hierarchical Bayesian random-effects model.ResultsIncluded were 3 Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved investigational device exemption (IDE) trials that enrolled a total of 1810 low-risk patients with symptomatic severe AS for TAVR. We compared 380 bicuspid patients with 1430 tricuspid patients. Event rates at 30 days overall were low, with similar mortality (odds ratio [OR], 0.38; 95% credible interval [CrI]: 0.08, 1.78; I², 0%), non-disabling stroke (OR, 0.45; 95% CrI: 0.15, 1.07; I², 9%), and permanent pacemaker implantation (OR, 0.86; 95% CrI: 0.41, 1.47; I², 59%). There were statistically significant differences in disabling stroke (OR, 0.16; 95% CrI: 0.01, 0.90; I², NA) and coronary obstruction (OR, 0.21; 95% CrI: 0.05, 0.91) that disappeared after sensitivity analysis by adding a single event to the tricuspid arm. Hemodynamics were similar at 30 days.ConclusionsPreliminary data from the FDA-approved IDE trials of low-risk patients with bicuspid AS undergoing TAVR demonstrated 30-day outcomes comparable to low-risk tricuspid patients, except for a trend toward higher stroke in bicuspid patients. Randomized trials are warranted to reassure the safety and long-term outcome of TAVR in patients with severe bicuspid AS.