Key result
Empiric antithrombotic treatment in TAVI requires randomized trials to balance efficacy and bleeding risks.
Why the study?
Patients undergoing TAVI are at high risk for bleeding and stroke complications, and optimal antithrombotic therapy remains empirically determined and uncertain.
Expert review highlights elevated bleeding and stroke risks in transcatheter aortic valve implantation, indicating the need for randomized antithrombotic trials.
Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has emerged as a therapeutic alternative for patients with symptomatic aortic stenosis at high or prohibitive surgical risk. However, patients undergoing TAVI are also at high risk for both bleeding and stroke complications, and specific mechanical aspects of the procedure itself can increase the risk of these complications. The mechanisms of periprocedural bleeding complications seem to relate mainly to vascular/access site complications (related to the use of large catheters in a very old and frail elderly population), whereas the pathophysiology of cerebrovascular events remains largely unknown. Further, although mechanical complications, especially the interaction between the valve prosthesis and the native aortic valve, may play a major role in events that occur during TAVI, post-procedural events might also be related to a prothrombotic environment or state generated by the implanted valve, the occurrence of atrial arrhythmias, and associated comorbidities. Antithrombotic therapy in the setting of TAVI has been empirically determined, and unfractionated heparin during the procedure followed by dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin (indefinitely) and clopidogrel (1 to 6 months) is the most commonly recommended treatment. However, bleeding and cerebrovascular events are common; these may be modifiable with optimization of periprocedural and post-procedural pharmacology. Further, as the field of antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapy evolves, potential drug combinations will multiply, introducing variability in treatment. Randomized trials are the best path forward to determine the balance between the efficacy and risks of antithrombotic treatment in this high risk-population.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rodés‐Cabau et al. (2013) conducted a review in Symptomatic aortic stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Antithrombotic treatment was evaluated. Antithrombotic treatment in TAVI is currently empirically determined, highlighting the need for randomized trials to determine the balance between efficacy and bleeding risks.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: