Midterm Outcomes in Patients With Aortic Stenosis Treated With Contemporary Balloon‐Expandable and Self‐Expanding Valves: Does Valve Size Have an Impact on Outcome?

BACKGROUND: No data currently exist comparing the contemporary iterations of balloon‐expandable (BE) Edwards SAPIEN 3/Ultra and the self‐expanding (SE) Medtronic Evolut PRO/R34 valves. The aim of the study was the comparison of these transcatheter heart valves with emphasis on patients with small aortic annulus. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this retrospective registry, periprocedural outcomes and midterm all‐cause mortality were analyzed. A total of 1673 patients (917 SE versus 756 BE) were followed up for a median of 15 months. A total of 194 patients died (11.6%) during follow‐up. SE and BE groups showed similar survival at 1 (92.6% versus 90.6%) and 3 (80.3% versus 85.2%) years (P (log‐rank)=0.136). Compared with the BE group, patients treated with the SE device had lower peak (16.3±8 mm Hg SE versus 21.9±8 mm Hg BE) and mean (8.8±5 mm Hg SE versus 11.5±5 mm Hg BE) gradients at discharge. Conversely, the BE group demonstrated lower rates of at least moderate paravalvular regurgitation postoperatively (5.6% versus 0.7% for SE and BE valves, respectively; P<0.001). In patients treated with small transcatheter heart valves (≤26 mm for SE and ≤23 mm for BE; N=284 for SE and N=260 for BE), survival was higher among patients treated with SE valves at both 1 (96.7% SE versus 92.1% BE) and 3 (91.8% SE versus 82.2% BE) years (P (log‐rank)=0.042). In propensity‐matched patients treated with small transcatheter heart valve, there remained a trend for higher survival among the SE group at both 1 (97% SE versus 92.3% BE) and 3 years (91.8% SE versus 78.7% BE), P (log‐rank)=0.096). CONCLUSIONS: Real‐world comparison of the latest‐generation SE and BE devices demonstrated similar survival up to 3 years’ follow‐up. In patients with small transcatheter heart valves, there may be a trend for improved survival among those treated with SE valves.