Abstract:Objective We sought to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical adverse events in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) vs. tricuspid aortic valve (TAV) anatomy and the efficacy of balloon-expandable (BE) vs. self-expanding (SE) valves in the BAV population. Comparisons aforementioned will be made stratified into early- and new-generation devices. Differences of prosthetic geometry on CT between patients with BAV and TAV were presented. In addition, BAV morphological presentations in included studies were summarized. Method Observational studies and a randomized controlled trial of patients with BAV undergoing TAVR were included according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline. Results A total of 43 studies were included in the final analysis. In patients undergoing TAVR, type 1 BAV was the most common phenotype and type 2 BAV accounted for the least. Significant higher risks of conversion to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR), the need of a second valve, a moderate or severe paravalvular leakage (PVL), device failure, acute kidney injury (AKI), and stroke were observed in patients with BAV than in patients with TAV during hospitalization. BAV had a higher risk of new permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) both at hospitalization and a 30-day follow-up. Risk of 1-year mortality was significantly lower in patients with BAV than that with TAV [odds ratio (OR) = 0.85, 95% CI 0.75–0.97, p = 0.01]. BE transcatheter heart valves (THVs) had higher risks of annular rupture but a lower risk of the need of a second valve and a new PPI than SE THVs. Moreover, BE THV was less expanded and more elliptical in BAV than in TAV. In general, the rates of clinical adverse events were lower in new-generation THVs than in early-generation THVs in both BAV and TAV. Conclusions Despite higher risks of conversion to SAVR, the need of a second valve, moderate or severe PVL, device failure, AKI, stroke, and new PPI, TAVR seems to be a viable option for selected patients with severe bicuspid aortic stenosis (AS), which demonstrated a potential benefit of 1-year survival, especially among lower surgical risk population using new-generation devices. Larger randomized studies are needed to guide patient selection and verified the durable performance of THVs in the BAV population.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Bicuspid Aortic Valve Stenosis—We Need a Well-Designed Randomized Control Trial

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement for Bicuspid Vs. Tricuspid Aortic Stenosis among Patients at Low Surgical Risk in China: from the Multicenter National NTCVR Database

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement for bicuspid aortic valve disease: does conventional surgery have a future?

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Bicuspid Aortic Valve with Aortic Stenosis: a Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis

Transcatheter versus surgical valve replacement in patients with bicuspid aortic valves: an updated meta-analysis

Evaluation of the Safety and Efficacy of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Patients with a Severe Stenotic Bicuspid Aortic Valve in a Chinese Population.

Comparison of Procedural, Clinical and Valve Performance Results of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients with Bicuspid Versus Tricuspid Aortic Stenosis.

Comparison of efficacy and safety of transcatheter aortic valve replacement in aortic stenosis patients with bicuspid versus tricuspid aortic valves

Annular and Supra-Annular Structure Assessments for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients with Bicuspid Aortic Stenosis

Abstract 13931: Comparison of Inpatient Outcomes of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Bicuspid versus Tricuspid Aortic Valve Stenosis: An Insight From National Inpatient Sample

The application of transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients with bicuspid aortic valve stenosis

Research Progress of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Aortic Valve Stenosis due to Bicuspid Aortic Valve

Three-year Outcomes of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation for Bicuspid Versus Tricuspid Aortic Stenosis.

Patients With Bicuspid Aortic Stenosis Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Which patients with aortic stenosis should be referred to surgery rather than transcatheter aortic valve implantation?

Safety and efficacy of transcatheter aortic valve implantation in stenotic bicuspid aortic valve compared to tricuspid aortic valve: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The Predictors of Conduction Disturbances Following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Bicuspid Aortic Valve: A Multicenter Study

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation vs. surgical aortic valve replacement for treatment of symptomatic severe aortic stenosis: an updated meta-analysis.

What is the best approach in a patient with a failed aortic bioprosthetic valve: transcatheter aortic valve replacement or redo aortic valve replacement?

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients with bicuspid valve morphology: a roadmap towards standardization

[Evaluation of the Safety and Efficacy of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement with Domestic Prostheses for Patients with Severely Stenotic Bicuspid Aortic Valve].