Key result
Transcatheter vs surgical aortic valve replacement in lower-risk COPD patients is discussed in this editorial response without new quantitative data.
Why the study?
The authors expand the discussion in response to an editorial on whether similar comparisons of transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease could be expected in lower surgical risk patients.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Discusses outcomes of transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in lower-risk chronic lung disease, highlighting the need for refined risk stratification.
We appreciate the editorial by Lv et al . on our published manuscript in the Journal of American Heart Association , entitled “ Is Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Better Than Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease? A Nationwide Inpatient Sample Analysis ” (1). We read the editorial with great interest and therefore would like to expand the discussion on whether the similar results could be expected in lower surgical risk patients, which was pointed by them.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ando et al. (2019) conducted an editorial in Aortic stenosis with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) vs. Surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) was evaluated. Transcatheter vs surgical aortic valve replacement in lower-risk COPD patients is discussed in this editorial response without new quantitative data.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: