Abstract:Aims There is a growing body of literature on long‐term outcomes post‐transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), but to our knowledge, few research have focused on patients with advanced cardiac dysfunction. This challenging category of patients was excluded from the Partner 3 clinical trial. There are no data to guide the choice of valve type in patients with severely depressed ejection fraction. This study evaluates the safety, efficacy, and outcomes of TAVR in patients with severe aortic stenosis and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤ 35%. It compares post‐TAVR survival outcomes with self‐expanding (SEV) versus balloon‐expandable (BEV) valves in the context of cardiac dysfunction. Methods and results A retrospective cohort was conducted on 977 patients who underwent TAVR at Toulouse University Hospital between January 2016 and December 2020. The study population included two groups: LVEF ≤ 35% (N = 157) and LVEF ≥ 50% (N = 820). The group of LVEF ≤ 35% was divided into two subgroups according to the type of implanted device: self‐expanding (N = 66) versus balloon‐expandable (N = 91). The living status of each of study's participants was observed in December 2022. Patients with low ejection fraction were younger (82 vs. 84.6 years) and commonly males (71.3% vs. 45.6%). Procedural success was almost 98% in both study groups (97.5% vs. 97.9%). The prevalence of all in‐hospital post‐TAVR complications [acute kidney injury (3.8% vs. 2.2%), major bleeding events (2.5% vs. 3.2%), stroke (1.3% vs. 1.6%), pacemaker implantation (10.2% vs. 10.7%), major vascular complication (4.5% vs. 4.5%), new onset atrial fibrillation (3.2% vs. 3.4%), and in‐hospital death (3.2% vs. 2.8%)] were similar between groups (LVEF ≤ 35% vs. LVEF ≥ 50%). No difference in long‐term survival has been revealed over 3.4 years (P = 0.268). In patients with LVEF ≤ 35%, except for post‐TAVR mean aortic gradient (7.8 ± 4.2 vs. 10.2 ± 3.6), baseline and procedural characteristics were comparable between SEV versus BEV subgroups. An early improvement in LVEF (from 29.2 ± 5.5 to 37.4 ± 10.8) was observed. In patients with LVEF ≤ 35%, the all‐cause mortality rate was significantly higher in BEV than that in SEV subgroups, respectively (40.7% vs. 22.7%, P = 0.018). Kaplan–Meier curve showed better survival outcomes after SEV implantation (P = 0.032). A Cox regression identified BEV as independent predictor of mortality [HR = 3.276, 95% CI (1.520–7.060), P = 0.002]. Conclusions In the setting of low LVEF, TAVR remains a safe and effective procedure not associated with an increased risk of complications and mortality. SEV implantation may likely result in superior survival outcomes in patients with advanced cardiac dysfunction.

Temporal trends with the Evolut family of self‐expanding transcatheter heart valves: A single‐center experience

Use and performance of the evolut FX transcatheter aortic valve system

Supra-Annular Self-Expanding Versus Balloon-Expandable Valves for Valve-in-Valve Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Long-term outcomes of self-expanding versus balloon-expandable transcatheter aortic valves: Insights from the OBSERVANT study

Three‐year clinical outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients with bicuspid aortic disease: Comparison between self‐expanding and balloon‐expandable valves

Comparison of third generation balloon-expandable Edwards Sapien 3 versus self-expandable Evolut R in transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a meta-analysis

Comparison of Two Generations of Self-Expandable Transcatheter Heart Valves in Nine Surgical Valves: An In Vitro Study

Survival outcomes of TAVR and self‐expanding versus balloon‐expandable valves in patients with advanced cardiac dysfunction

Balloon-expandable versus self-expanding transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a comparison and evaluation of current findings

Early and Midterm Outcomes of Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Replacement with Balloon-Expandable Versus Self-Expanding Valves: A Meta-Analysis

Propensity-matched comparison of balloon-expandable and self-expanding valves for transcatheter aortic valve replacement in a Chinese population

Comparison of two self-expanding transcatheter heart valves for degenerated surgical bioprostheses: the AVENGER multicentre registry

Improved Hemodynamics with Self-Expanding Compared to Balloon Expandable Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Small Annulus Patients: A Propensity-Matched Analysis

Meta-analysis of short- and long-term clinical outcomes of the self-expanding Evolut R/pro valve versus the balloon-expandable Sapien 3 valve for transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Prosthesis Infolding Incidence and Short-Term Outcomes in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Using Evolut Self-Expandable Device: A Multicenter Study

Size of Self-Expandable Transcatheter Heart Valve and Mid-Term Adverse Events After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Transcatheter Valve-in-Valve Replacement With Balloon- Versus Self-Expanding Valves in Patients With Degenerated Stentless Aortic Bioprosthesis

Balloon‐expandable versus self‐expanding valves for transcatheter aortic valve replacement using new generation devices: An analysis of the Brazilian RIBAC‐NT registry

Comparison of Evolut-R 34 mm Valve and Smaller Evolut-R Valves in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation and Determination of Mild Paravalvular Leak Predictors

Optimal Oversizing in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement with the Self-Expanding Evolut Valve System

Short- and Long-term Clinical Outcomes of Balloon-expandable Versus Self-expanding Valves in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Meta-analysis