TY - JOUR
T1 - Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement With Intra-Annular Self-Expanding or Balloon-Expandable Valves
T2 - The Multicenter International NAVULTRA Registry
AU - Cannata, Stefano
AU - Sultan, Ibrahim
AU - Van Mieghem, Nicolas
AU - Giordano, Arturo
AU - De Backer, Ole
AU - Byrne, Johnathan
AU - Tchetche, Didier
AU - Buccheri, Sergio
AU - Nombela-Franco, Luis
AU - Teles, Rui Campante
AU - Barbanti, Marco
AU - Barbato, Emanuele
AU - Amat Santos, Ignacio
AU - Blackman, Daniel J
AU - Maisano, Francesco
AU - Lorusso, Roberto
AU - La Spina, Ketty
AU - Millin, Antonella
AU - Kliner, Dustin E
AU - van den Dorpel, Mark
AU - Acerbi, Elena
AU - Lulic, Davorka
AU - Divekar, Kaivalya
AU - Cesario, Vincenzo
AU - Chavez Solsol, Jorge Francisco
AU - Brito, Joao
AU - Costa, Giuliano
AU - Casenghi, Matteo
AU - Fernandez Cordon, Clara
AU - Sherwen, Amanda
AU - Buzzatti, Nicola
AU - Pasta, Salvatore
AU - Turrisi, Marco
AU - Minacori, Michele
AU - Manca, Paolo
AU - Nuzzi, Vincenzo
AU - Tamburino, Corrado
AU - Bedogni, Francesco
AU - Gandolfo, Caterina
AU - Latib, Azeem
N1 - Copyright © 2025 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
PY - 2025/6/23
Y1 - 2025/6/23
N2 - BACKGROUND: No comparative data exist with the self-expanding Navitor (NAV) and the balloon-expandable SAPIEN 3 Ultra (ULTRA) transcatheter heart valves (THVs).OBJECTIVES: This study sought to investigate the 1-year outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement using the intra-annular NAV and the ULTRA THVs.METHODS: The NAVULTRA (Navitor and SAPIEN 3 Ultra) registry included consecutive patients who underwent transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement at 16 centers with NAV or ULTRA between November 2018 and April 2024. Propensity score matching was used for adjustment. The primary outcomes of interest were all-cause death and the composite of all-cause death, disabling stroke, and hospitalization for heart failure at 1 year.RESULTS: The overall study cohort included 3,878 patients treated with NAV (n = 1,746) or ULTRA (n = 2,176). The propensity score-matched population resulted in 1,363 pairs. At 1 year, the rate of death from any cause was 9.7% with NAV and 9.9% with ULTRA (adjusted P = 0.585). Similarly, there were no significant differences in primary composite outcome (13.6% in the NAV group and 12.6% in the ULTRA group; adjusted P = 0.218). The rate of new permanent pacemaker implantation (20.6% vs 10.6%; adjusted P < 0.01) and heart failure rehospitalization (4.6% vs 2.8%; adjusted P < 0.05) was higher in NAV group. At 1 year, the use of NAV was associated with higher rates of mild paravalvular leak (OR: 1.53; 95% CI: 1.01 to 2.33; adjusted P < 0.05) but lower mean transprosthetic gradients compared with ULTRA (mean change:-3.90, 95% CI: -4.47 to -3.34; adjusted P < 0.01).CONCLUSIONS: Both intra-annular THVs were associated with similar 1-year clinical outcomes; however, differences were observed in secondary clinical endpoints and valve hemodynamic performance.
AB - BACKGROUND: No comparative data exist with the self-expanding Navitor (NAV) and the balloon-expandable SAPIEN 3 Ultra (ULTRA) transcatheter heart valves (THVs).OBJECTIVES: This study sought to investigate the 1-year outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement using the intra-annular NAV and the ULTRA THVs.METHODS: The NAVULTRA (Navitor and SAPIEN 3 Ultra) registry included consecutive patients who underwent transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement at 16 centers with NAV or ULTRA between November 2018 and April 2024. Propensity score matching was used for adjustment. The primary outcomes of interest were all-cause death and the composite of all-cause death, disabling stroke, and hospitalization for heart failure at 1 year.RESULTS: The overall study cohort included 3,878 patients treated with NAV (n = 1,746) or ULTRA (n = 2,176). The propensity score-matched population resulted in 1,363 pairs. At 1 year, the rate of death from any cause was 9.7% with NAV and 9.9% with ULTRA (adjusted P = 0.585). Similarly, there were no significant differences in primary composite outcome (13.6% in the NAV group and 12.6% in the ULTRA group; adjusted P = 0.218). The rate of new permanent pacemaker implantation (20.6% vs 10.6%; adjusted P < 0.01) and heart failure rehospitalization (4.6% vs 2.8%; adjusted P < 0.05) was higher in NAV group. At 1 year, the use of NAV was associated with higher rates of mild paravalvular leak (OR: 1.53; 95% CI: 1.01 to 2.33; adjusted P < 0.05) but lower mean transprosthetic gradients compared with ULTRA (mean change:-3.90, 95% CI: -4.47 to -3.34; adjusted P < 0.01).CONCLUSIONS: Both intra-annular THVs were associated with similar 1-year clinical outcomes; however, differences were observed in secondary clinical endpoints and valve hemodynamic performance.
KW - intra-annular
KW - Navitor
KW - SAPIEN 3 Ultra
KW - TAVR
KW - Risk Assessment
KW - Balloon Valvuloplasty/mortality
KW - Humans
KW - Heart Valve Prosthesis
KW - Risk Factors
KW - Male
KW - Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement/adverse effects
KW - Treatment Outcome
KW - Prosthesis Design
KW - Recovery of Function
KW - Aortic Valve/physiopathology
KW - Time Factors
KW - Aged, 80 and over
KW - Registries
KW - Female
KW - Aortic Valve Stenosis/mortality
KW - Aged
KW - Retrospective Studies
KW - Hemodynamics
KW - Heart Failure/therapy
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=105004674407&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jcin.2025.03.015
DO - 10.1016/j.jcin.2025.03.015
M3 - Journal article
C2 - 40347199
SN - 1936-8798
VL - 18
SP - 1557
EP - 1568
JO - JACC. Cardiovascular interventions
JF - JACC. Cardiovascular interventions
IS - 12
ER -