Valvular & structural heart diseaseMeta-analysis
Aortic Valve Replacement in Women
- Patient-level pooled analysis of the RHEIA and PARTNER 3 randomised trials
- individual patient data
- women only
Authors' conclusion
Among women with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis, TAVR led to a reduction in the rate of the combined endpoint of all-cause mortality, stroke, or rehospitalization at 1-year follow-up, largely due to a significant reduction in the rate of rehospitalization.
Study context
- Population
- Women with severe aortic stenosis (mean age ∼73 years, mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score 2.1%)
- Participants
- 376 vs 336
- Comparison
- TAVR vs surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR)
- TAVRn = 376
- SAVRn = 336reference
- Outcome
- All-cause mortality, all stroke, or rehospitalization
- Follow-up
- 1 year
Pooled result
As reported in the abstract
Absolute difference
−8.2 %
95% CI −13.1% to −3.3%
P < 0.001
By group
TAVR vs SAVR
absolute difference −8.2 % (95% CI −13.1% to −3.3%); P < 0.001
Further pooled results
All-cause mortality · 1 year · Kaplan-Meier estimates
P = 0.27
All stroke · 1 year · Kaplan-Meier estimates
P = 0.35
Rehospitalization · 1 year · Kaplan-Meier estimates
P = 0.002
| Outcome | TAVR | SAVR | absolute difference (95% CI) | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| All-cause death or stroke | 3.5% | 5.4% | −1.9% (−5.0% to 1.1%) | P = 0.21 | |
| −6−4−202Difference (linear scale) |
All-cause death or stroke
- Similar between the 2 treatment groups
Original publication
Aortic Valve Replacement in Women. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. Published 23 June 2025. doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2025.03.036
Summarised from the published abstract; every number is checked against it