Valvular & structural heart disease

Aortic Valve Replacement in Women: A Pooled Analysis of the RHEIA and PARTNER 3 Trials

JACC Cardiovasc IntervPublished Patient-level pooled analysis of the RHEIA and PARTNER 3 randomised trials

Pooled resultResult — go to the resultAbsolute difference −8.2 % 95% CI −13.1% to −3.3%

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
Methodological detailsindividual patient data, women only
  • Individual patient data
  • Women only

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

OutcomeTAVRSAVRAbsolute difference (95% CI)P value
All-cause death or stroke3.5%5.4%−1.9% (−5.0% to 1.1%)P = 0.21

All-cause death or stroke

Similar between the 2 treatment groups

Original publication

Aortic Valve Replacement in Women: A Pooled Analysis of the RHEIA and PARTNER 3 Trials. 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

Get them every week

New studies on this topic in My Week and in your Monday e-mail.

We e-mail you a sign-in link and a code. No password, no spam.