Background: Many patients who have aortic stenosis and are transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) candidates have underwent prior cardiac surgery (PCS). The aim of this study was to provide a robust summary comparison between patients with PCS who underwent TAVR vs. surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR).Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of all published articles on PubMed/Medline, Ovid, EMBASE, and Scopus from 2002 to 2019.Results: A total of 13 studies were finally included, yielding a total of 23,148 participants. There was no statistical difference with 30-day [OR: 1.02 (0.86–1.21)] or 1-year mortality [OR: 1.18 (0.86–1.61)] between the two groups. Subgroup analysis revealed that high-risk patients who underwent TAVR with the transapical approach were associated with increased risk of mortality [OR: 1.45 (1.00–2.11)]. However, those who underwent TAVR with endovascular approach had a comparable outcome with SAVR.Conclusions: Primary outcomes after endovascular TAVR were similar to those with SAVR and superior to transapical TAVR treatment group in patients with PCS.
CRT-600.15 Procedural Complications of Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Replacement Versus Surgical Aortic-Valve Replacement in Low- to Intermediate-Risk Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials
