An interventional study of TAVR for BAV Using Down Sizing with the Evolut Pro platform and TAVR for BAV Using Traditional Sizing strategy with the Evolut Pro platform in Aortic Stenosis With Bicuspid Valve, sponsored by Second Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University. Recruiting at 15 sites in China. Open to participants aged 60 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2025-10-03.
Sponsored by Second Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment
To compare down sizing strategy versus annular sizing strategy technique (control group) in Type 0 bicuspid aortic stenosis (AS) patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with self-expanding valves (SEVs): a randomized superiority trial
Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has emerged as a favorable alternative for severe symptomatic aortic stenosis (AS) patients of all surgical risk profiles. Patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) underwent TAVR had similar 30-day mortality as well as stroke and new pacemaker implantation rates compared to tricuspid aortic valve (TAV) subjects, but carried higher risk of moderate/severe perivalvular leakage (PVL), conversion to surgery and device failure. Clinical experience in China suggests BAV and heavy calcium burden are more common among TAVR candidates than US/EU cohorts.
Morphological characteristics at supra-annular structure (from annulus to the level of sinotubular junction) are quite complex in BAV, especially concomitant with heavily calcified leaflets. From our previous single center clinical practice, "waist sign" above the annulus during balloon aortic valvuloplasty in TAVR was often observed in patients with bicuspid AS, suggesting that supra-annular structures are the most constrained portion of BAV anatomy where the prosthesis anchors and seals. Therefore, we developed a balloon based supra-annular sizing strategy for self-expanding valves implantation in BAV and the device failure rate as well as pacemaker implantation rates were relatively low as shown in previous cohort study. Several other studies have also achieved successful outcomes associated with device "down sizing" (using a device smaller than that recommended by annular sizing).
The aim of this study is to compare "down sizing"strategy (experimental group) versus annular sizing strategy (control group) in BAV patients undergoing TAVR with self-expanding valves.
Second Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University is the lead sponsor of 1,058 studies on the registry; 511 are open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Exclusion Criteria:
Balloon sizing will be used during procedural. Pre-dilation with balloon size just below the annular size. 20mm for annular size of 20-23mm. 23mm for annular size 23-26mm. Waist sign with less than mild contrast regurgitation: Evolut PRO Valve one size smaller than manufacturer recommendation and Target implant depth 0-3mm. No waist sign and/or contrast regurgitation or unable to finish supra-annular sizing: Evolut PRO annular sizing (per manufacturer recommendation) with implant depth 0-3mm.
Procedure: TAVR for BAV Using Down Sizing with the Evolut Pro platform
Pre-dilation with balloon size just below the annular size. 20mm for annular size of 20-23mm. 23mm for annular size 23-26mm. The prosthesis size of Evolut PRO will be chosen based on manufacturer recommendation. The target implant depth will be 0-3mm.
Procedure: TAVR for BAV Using Traditional Sizing strategy with the Evolut Pro platform
Down sizing strategy in Type 0 bicuspid aortic stenosis patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement with self-expanding valves
Also known as: Down Sizing Strategy
Traditional sizing strategy in Type 0 bicuspid aortic stenosis patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement with self-expanding valves
Also known as: Standard Sizing Strategy
Composite endpoint of Clinical Event Rate of Device Success (VARC-3), Free of pacemaker implantation, and Free of new onset complete left bundle branch block at 1 month
Composite endpoint of Device Success (VARC-3), Free of pacemaker implantation, and Free of new onset complete left bundle branch block at 1 month
Time frame: 1 month after index procedure
New onset complete left bundle branch block
New onset complete left bundle branch block with QRS ≥120ms at 1 month
Time frame: 1 month after index procedure
Permanent pacemaker implantation
Permanent pacemaker implantation within one month
Time frame: 1 month after index procedure
Device success Rate
Device success per VARC-3 definition
Time frame: 1 month after index procedure
More than (≥) moderate regurgitation
More than (≥) moderate regurgitation on echocardiography at 1month
Time frame: 1 month after index procedure
Plan to share: No — undecided
Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.
Contact study teamGet an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
Second Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University