article · Journal of Cardiology
BACKGROUND: Balloon-expandable valves (BEVs) and self-expanding valves (SEVs) are the two primary platforms for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), differing in design, deployment, and hemodynamic performance. Comparative evidence on their clinical and procedural outcomes remains limited and inconsistent. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted, searching PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library up to July 2025 for studies comparing BEVs and SEVs in adults with severe aortic stenosis undergoing transfemoral TAVR. Outcomes included all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, stroke, permanent pacemaker implantation, hemodynamic parameters, device success, and safety endpoints. Dichotomous and continuous outcomes were pooled as risk ratios (RR) and mean differences (MD) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) using a random-effects model. RESULTS: ). Long-term mortality and safety outcomes, including major bleeding, vascular complications, and myocardial infarction, were comparable. CONCLUSION: BEVs offer early survival and conduction preservation advantages, while SEVs provide superior hemodynamic performance. These findings highlight the importance of individualized valve selection based on patient-specific factors. Further randomized trials with extended follow-up are needed to evaluate long-term durability and outcomes in diverse patient populations.
This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.
DOI: 10.1016/j.jjcc.2026.06.009
Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.
Discussion
Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.
No discussion yet. Open the first thread.
New to MARATTO™? Create a free account.