ISSN 1016-5169 | E-ISSN 1308-4488
pdf
Balloon-Expandable Versus Self-Expanding Valves in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement for Patients with Left Ventricular Systolic Dysfunction-Uncorrected Proof [Turk Kardiyol Dern Ars]
Turk Kardiyol Dern Ars. Ahead of Print: TKDA-00702 | DOI: 10.5543/tkda.2025.00702

Balloon-Expandable Versus Self-Expanding Valves in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement for Patients with Left Ventricular Systolic Dysfunction-Uncorrected Proof

Berhan Keskin, Aykun Hakgör, Atakan Dursun, Aysel Akhundova, Ümeyir Savur, Beytullah Çakal, Hacı Murat Güneş, Ekrem Güler, İbrahim Oğuz Karaca, Bilal Boztosun
Department of Cardiology, Istanbul Medipol University, Medipol Mega University Hospital, Istanbul, Türkiye

Objective: Patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) and left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) represent a particularly fragile subgroup undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Comparative outcome data for balloon-expandable valves (BEV) and self-expanding valves (SEV) in this population remain scarce.

Method: This retrospective single-center study evaluated 246 consecutive subjects with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) < 50% who underwent transfemoral TAVR between January 2015 and June 2025. Clinical, echocardiographic, and procedural characteristics were compared between BEV (n = 96) and SEV (n = 150) recipients. Long-term all-cause mortality served as the primary endpoint.

Results: Individuals treated with BEV were older (78.8 ± 7.9 vs. 75.7 ± 9.8 years; P = 0.019) and demonstrated higher EuroSCORE II (European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation II) values (24.9 ± 6.2% vs. 22.2 ± 15.8%; P = 0.01). Periprocedural and in-hospital clinical outcomes, including mortality, vascular complications, and pacemaker requirement, were comparable between groups. SEV implantation yielded lower post-procedural transvalvular gradients (mean 7.8 ± 4.0 mmHg vs. 9.6 ± 4.1 mmHg; P = 0.001). Although crude mortality was observed more frequently among BEV patients (50.0% vs. 36.0%; P = 0.041), Kaplan–Meier survival curves showed no survival difference (log-rank P = 0.92). In multivariable Cox regression, predictors of long-term mortality included older age (hazard ratio [HR] 1.05; P = 0.007), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (HR: 2.64; P < 0.001), coronary artery disease (HR: 2.08; P = 0.018), lower serum albumin (HR: 0.63; P = 0.011), and lower hemoglobin (HR: 0.84; P = 0.023); valve type was not predictive.

Conclusion: In patients with LVSD undergoing TAVR, BEV and SEV provided comparable procedural and long-term outcomes. Although SEV yielded lower postoperative gradients, valve type did not affect survival. Future studies with larger samples and higher use of new-generation devices are warranted to refine valve selection in this high-risk group.

Keywords: Balloon-expandable valve, low-flow low-gradient aortic stenosis, self-expanding valve, transcatheter aortic valve implantation, transcatheter aortic valve replacement


Corresponding Author: Berhan Keskin
Manuscript Language: English
×
APA
NLM
AMA
MLA
Chicago
Copied!
CITE


Journal Metrics

Journal Citation Indicator: 0.18
CiteScore: 1.1
Source Normalized Impact
per Paper:
0.22
SCImago Journal Rank: 0.348

Quick Search

Copyright © 2026 Archives of the Turkish Society of Cardiology



Kare Publishing is a subsidiary of Kare Media.