Skip to main content
. 2020 Mar;12(3):893–906. doi: 10.21037/jtd.2019.12.107

Table 1. Studies’ and patients’ baseline characteristics.

First author/year Study period Design Intervention Cohort Age
(years)
Females
(%)
BMI
(kg/m2)
NYHA
III/IV (%)
STS-PROM (%) Logistic EuroSCORE (%) Mean aortic gradient (mmHg) Aortic annulus diameter (mm) Access
site
Follow-up (months) VARC-2 outcomes definitions ROBINS-I tool bias assessment
Abdel-Wahab 2016 (20) 12.2013–10.2015 SC, RCS, PM Sapien 3 60 81.2±5.1 56.7 28.3±4.9 NR 4.9±3.1 17.6±10.8 46.1±16.1 25.0±2.2 NR 12 Yes Moderate
Lotus 60 80.7±5.2 56.7 28.2±5.6 NR 5.4±3.0 17.6±10.5 46.1±18.5 24.7±2.2 NR
Fovino 2018 (21) 08.2013–01.2017 MCR, PCS, PM Sapien 3 93 79.8±5.8 41.9& 26.3±4.3 53.8 8.7±8.0 15.3±10.5& 42.6±16.9 24.8±2.1 Femoral 100% 1 Yes Moderate
Lotus 93 80.5±7.0 44.1& 25.9±4.6 51.6 9.0±5.2 15.9±10.2& 47.8±14.1 24.1±2.3 Femoral 100%
Jarr 2017 (23) 08.2014–01.2016 SC, RCS CoreValve 36 82.3±4.7 73.8 NR NR 6.2±4.7 NR 38.7±14.0 23.5±1.7& Femoral 100% 1 Yes Serious
Evolut R 109
Sapien 3 90 81.7±7.3 26.7 NR NR 5.3±4.8 NR 38.3±14.5 25.4±2.3& Femoral 100%
Lotus 63 81.3±5.1 33.3 NR NR 5.6±4.5 NR 38.1±13.0 24.7±1.9& Femoral 100%
Marzahn 2018 (24) 07.2008–05.2015 SC, RCS CoreValve 272 80.5±6.1 55.7 27.8±8.7 NR NR 15.9±10.3 42.7±16.6 NR Femoral 100% 12 Nr Serious
Evolut R 7
Portico 26
DFM 41
Sapien XT 262
Sapien 3 234
Lotus 14
Pilgrim 2016 (25) 02.2014–09.2015 MCR, PCS Sapien 3 815 81.9±6.4 43.2 26.9±5.3 66.8 5.0±3.8& 18.9±14.8& 46.1±21.5 NR Femoral 100% 1 Yes Moderate
Lotus 140 83.0±5.4 46.4 26.6±4.8 58.6 4.1±2.4& 15.0±8.6& 49.4±19.5 NR Femoral 100%
Schofer 2018 (26) 2014–2015 SC, RCS Sapien 3 212 80.6±7.2 48.1 27.3±5.7 92.9 5.9±5.6 16.1±11.0 35.0±16.8& 24.6±2.3 Femoral 100% 1 Yes Moderate
Lotus 61 80.5±7.5 57.4 28.6±6.4 86.9 4.8±2.6 13.4±8.6 40.6±14.2& 24.0±2.0 Femoral 100%
Seeger 2017 (27) 06.2014–2016 SC, PCS, PM Sapien 3 202 80.1±6.4 57.4 27.1±4.8 77.2 6.5±5.2 14.6±13.0 35.0±15.0 24.6±2.6 Femoral 100% 24 Yes Moderate
Lotus 202 81.2±5.2 56.7 26.7±4.8 73.1 6.8±5.0 13.2±12.1 36.0±16.0 24.3±1.7 Femoral 100%
Sinning 2017 (28) 2010–2016 SC, RCS Direct Flow Medical 38 80.9±6.3 49.2 NR NR 5.6±3.6 NR NR NR NR 36 Yes Serious
CoreValve 400
Evolut R 114
Sapien XT 48
Sapien 3 101
Lotus 104
Soliman 2018 (29)* 09.2013–12.2015 SC, PCS Sapien 3 83 80.0±8.0 46 27.1±5.0 74.4 NR 15.5±9.5 NR 24.9±2.3 Femoral 90%&; apical 10%& 1 Yes Serious
Lotus 79 80.0±7.0 56 28.0±5.3 74.7 NR 14.0±9.3 NR 24.3±1.7 Femoral 100%&
van Gils 2017 (22)* 05.2008–02.2016 MCR, RCS CoreValve 130 83.0±6.0 39 26.0±5.0 78& 7.1±4.4 NR NR NR Femoral 91%&; apical 1%&; subclavian 8%& 12 Yes Serious
Sapien XT 124 83.0±8.0 33 27.0±4.0 83& 7.0±4.6 NR NR NR Femoral 79%&; apical 10%&; subclavian 11%&
Sapien 3 32 81.0±6.0 37 27.0±4.0 53& 6.0±5.8 NR NR NR Femoral 78%&; apical 19%&; subclavian 3%&
Lotus 20 83.0±6.0 40 29.0±7.0 74& 6.3±2.1 NR NR NR Femoral 100%&
Wöhrle 2015 (30) 01.2014–06.2014 SC, RCS Sapien 3 52 82.6±6.2& 48 NR 79 7.3±5.3 17.7±11.8 35.0±15.0 24.6±1.7 Femoral 100% 1 Yes Moderate
Lotus 26 79.3±5.3& 62 NR 62 41.0±17.0 25.2±1.7 Femoral 100%

*, a possibility of insignificantly overlap of van Gils and Soliman studies (22,29) exists. Fifty-two van Gils’ patients were drawn from four centers and 162 Soliman’s exclusively from 1 shared with van Gils’ center; &, variables that differed significantly. SC, single centre; RCS, retrospective cases series; PM, propensity match; MCR, multicentre registry; PCS, prospective cohort study; BMI, body mass index; NYHA, New York Heart Association; STS-PROM, Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality; EuroSCORE, European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation; VARC, Valve Academic Research Consortium; NR, not reported.