Key result
Transcatheter aortic valve replacement emerged as the preferred treatment over surgical replacement in intermediate-risk patients and showed clinical equivalence in low-risk populations.
Why the study?
Does transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) compare favorably to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) across various risk profiles and challenging subsets of patients with aortic stenosis?
Does transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) compare favorably to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) across various risk profiles and challenging subsets of patients with aortic stenosis?
This 2016 review highlights the expansion of TAVR into intermediate and low-risk aortic stenosis populations, as well as technically challenging subsets.
Supports TAVR preference in intermediate-risk aortic stenosis; extends review synthesis but leaves low-risk durability open.
Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) continued to make major strides in 2016, simultaneously expanding its application to lower risk patients as well as more technically challenging subsets of patients with aortic stenosis (AS). The two major accomplishments this year were the establishment of TAVR as the preferred treatment strategy over surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in intermediate risk patients, and initial signals that TAVR and SAVR may be clinically equivalent in low-risk populations. Meanwhile, there is continued expansion of TAVR to challenging clinical subsets (bicuspid aortic valve [BAV], patients with concomitant advanced coronary artery disease [CAD], and failed surgical bioprostheses), and encouraging initial experiences with newer transcatheter heart valve systems. This paper summarizes the major research studies published on TAVR in 2016.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Harjai et al. (2017) conducted a review in Aortic stenosis. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) vs. Surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) was evaluated. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement emerged as the preferred treatment over surgical replacement in intermediate-risk patients and showed clinical equivalence in low-risk populations.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: