6/29/23, 1:34 AM PARTNER 3 Pathway Feedback Search Clinical Topics Home Studies PARTNER 3 PARTNER 3 Disease Aortic stenosis Trial question Is TAVR superior to SAVR in patients with severe aortic stenosis and low surgical risk? Study design Multi-center Open label RCT Population Characteristics of study participants 31.0% female N = 950 69.0% male 950 patients (292 female, 658 male) Inclusion criteria: patients with severe aortic stenosis who were at low risk of death with surgery Key exclusion criteria: clinical frailty, bicuspid aortic valves, or other anatomical features increasing the risk of complications Interventions N=496 TAVR (with a third-generation balloon-expandable valve) N=454 surgical AVR (with a bioprosthetic valve) Primary outcome Death, stroke or rehospitalization at 1 year 15.1 % 15.1 https://web.pathway.md/studies/rec0smfwYooXbcrmV 1/2 6/29/23, 1:34 AM PARTNER 3 Pathway 5 11.3 % 8.5 7.5 % Significant decrease 3.8 % NNT = 15 0.0 % Transcatheter aortic valve replacement Surgical AVR Significant decrease in death, stroke or rehospitalization at 1 year (8.5% vs. 15.1%; HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.79) Secondary outcomes Significant decrease in stroke (0.6% vs. 2.4%; HR 0.25, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.88) Significant decrease in death or stroke (1% vs. 3.3%; HR 0.3, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.83) Significant decrease in new-onset AF (5% vs. 39.5%; HR 0.1, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.16) Safety outcomes No significant differences in safety end points at 30 days, including major vascular complications and new permanent pacemaker insertions. Conclusion In patients with severe aortic stenosis who were at low risk of death with surgery, TAVR was superior to surgical AVR with respect to death, stroke or rehospitalization at 1 year. Reference Mack MJ, Leon MB, Thourani VH et al. Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Replacement with a Balloon- Expandable Valve in Low-Risk Patients. N Engl J Med. 2019 May 2;380(18):1695-1705. Open reference URL https://web.pathway.md/studies/rec0smfwYooXbcrmV 2/2