ABSTRACT NUMBER: ESOC2026YS112 STROKE PREVENTION WITH CEREBRAL EMBOLIC PROTECTION DEVICES DURING TRANSCATHETER AORTIC VALVE REPLACEMENT: SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS

Abstract Background and aims Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is an established therapy for severe aortic stenosis; however, periprocedural stroke remains a serious complication. Cerebral embolic protection devices (CEPDs) have been introduced to reduce cerebral embolization during TAVR, but their clinical effectiveness is uncertain. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of CEPDs using trial sequential analysis (TSA) and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) framework. Methods We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing TAVR with versus without CEPD. Four electronic databases were searched from inception to April 2025. Primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), all-cause stroke, and disabling stroke. Risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were pooled using random-effects models. TSA assessed information size, statistical significance, and futility (α=5%, power=80%). Results Nine trials including 11,876 patients (CEPD 6,140; control 5,736) were analyzed. CEPD use was not associated with significant reductions in mortality (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.68–1.58), MACCE (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.69–1.86), all-cause stroke (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.74–1.16), or disabling stroke (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.47–1.26). Secondary neurological and imaging outcomes showed no meaningful benefit. TSA and subgroup analyses confirmed the absence of statistically robust or clinically relevant effects. Current evidence does not support routine CEPD use during TAVR, as no significant reduction in stroke or major clinical outcomes was demonstrated. Conflict of interest None Figure 1 - belongs to Methods Figure 2 - belongs to Methods Figure 3 - belongs to Results

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
European Stroke Journal
Published
2026-05-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/esj/aakag023.1198
Primary Topic
Cardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

ABSTRACT NUMBER: ESOC2026YS112 STROKE PREVENTION WITH CEREBRAL EMBOLIC PROTECTION DEVICES DURING TRANSCATHETER AORTIC VALVE REPLACEMENT: SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS

Noha Hammad
European Stroke Journal
Cardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
article

ABSTRACT NUMBER: ESOC2026YS112 STROKE PREVENTION WITH CEREBRAL EMBOLIC PROTECTION DEVICES DURING TRANSCATHETER AORTIC VALVE REPLACEMENT: SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS

Noha Hammad
article en

Abstract

Abstract Background and aims Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is an established therapy for severe aortic stenosis; however, periprocedural stroke remains a serious complication. Cerebral embolic protection devices (CEPDs) have been introduced to reduce cerebral embolization during TAVR, but their clinical effectiveness is uncertain. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of CEPDs using trial sequential analysis (TSA) and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) framework. Methods We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing TAVR with versus without CEPD. Four electronic databases were searched from inception to April 2025. Primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), all-cause stroke, and disabling stroke. Risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were pooled using random-effects models. TSA assessed information size, statistical significance, and futility (α=5%, power=80%). Results Nine trials including 11,876 patients (CEPD 6,140; control 5,736) were analyzed. CEPD use was not associated with significant reductions in mortality (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.68–1.58), MACCE (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.69–1.86), all-cause stroke (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.74–1.16), or disabling stroke (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.47–1.26). Secondary neurological and imaging outcomes showed no meaningful benefit. TSA and subgroup analyses confirmed the absence of statistically robust or clinically relevant effects. Current evidence does not support routine CEPD use during TAVR, as no significant reduction in stroke or major clinical outcomes was demonstrated. Conflict of interest None Figure 1 - belongs to Methods Figure 2 - belongs to Methods Figure 3 - belongs to Results

European Stroke JournalVol. 11(Supplement_1)
Port Said University (EG)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
Cardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

ABSTRACT NUMBER: ESOC2026YS112 STROKE PREVENTION WITH CEREBRAL EMBOLIC PROTECTION DEVICES DURING TRANSCATHETER AORTIC VALVE REPLACEMENT: SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS — Noha Hammad · European Stroke Journal (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS