Key result
Surgical aortic valve replacement remains an excellent option with favorable outcomes in the treatment of aortic stenosis in the contemporary TAVI era.
SAVR remains a valid and excellent treatment option for aortic stenosis in the era of expanding TAVI indications.
The advent of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has changed the way aortic stenosis (AS) is treated. In the last decade, the improvement of techniques and the development of more performing devices helped in granting TAVI approval for its use in high- and intermediate-risk patients and more recently in low-risk patients. With the majority of surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) procedures being done on low-risk patients, recent results from the PARTNER 3 and Evolut Low Risk trials have ignited the question of TAVI use in patient category as well as an alternative to SAVR. The paper by a group from the Royal Papworth Hospital from the University of Cambridge, UK, published in the Journal of Cardiac Surgery, should serve as concrete proof that SAVR remains an excellent option with favorable outcomes in the treatment of AS. It is a wake-up call to the entire surgical community to push forward to ameliorate outcomes and reduce complications through innovation and experience, newer surgical techniques, better equipment, and improved valves to adapt to the changing world of heart valve diseases.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Khalil et al. (2021) conducted an editorial in Aortic stenosis. Surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) vs. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) was evaluated. Surgical aortic valve replacement remains an excellent option with favorable outcomes in the treatment of aortic stenosis in the contemporary TAVI era.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: