Home > Journals > Minerva Cardioangiologica > Past Issues > Minerva Cardioangiologica 2018 April;66(2) > Minerva Cardioangiologica 2018 April;66(2):205-12

CURRENT ISSUE
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Publication history
Reprints
Cite this article as

MINERVA CARDIOANGIOLOGICA

A Journal on Heart and Vascular Diseases


Official Journal of the Italian Society of Angiology and Vascular Pathology
Indexed/Abstracted in: EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch), Scopus
Impact Factor 0,695


eTOC

 

REVIEW  DIFFERENT APPROACHES TO AORTIC VALVE TREATMENT: SUTURELESS AVR VERSUS TAVI


Minerva Cardioangiologica 2018 April;66(2):205-12

DOI: 10.23736/S0026-4725.17.04569-8

Copyright © 2017 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: English

Sutureless aortic valve and TAVI: pros and cons

Thierry FOLLIGUET

Cardiovascular Surgery and Transplantation, Louis Mathieu Heart and Vessels Institute, University Hospital of Brabois, University of Lorraine, Vandoeuvre Les Nancy, France


PDF  


Aortic valve replacement (AVR) with biological heart valves remains the gold standard for treating operable older patients with symptomatic aortic stenosis. Over the last few years, transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has been shown to be superior to medical treatment in high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis. The transfemoral TAVI route has been also found in randomized controlled trials to be as good as, if not superior to, standard AVR at 5 years in high-risk patients. In intermediate-risk patients, TAVI was found in randomized controlled trials as a non-inferior alternative to surgery, with a different pattern of adverse events associated with each procedure. In retrospective propensity matched analysis, the use of TAVI in patients with an intermediate to high risk profile was associated with a significantly higher incidence of perioperative complications and decreased survival at short and mid-term when compared with conventional surgery and sutureless valve implantation. More data is needed to draw a firm conclusion comparing the two treatments in intermediate-risk patients. Sutureless bioprostheses may represent a viable alternative to standard bioprostheses for intermediate and high-risk patients when having conventional surgery.


KEY WORDS: Aortic valve - Sutureless surgical procedures - Bioprosthesis

top of page

Publication History

Issue published online: March 5, 2018
Article first published online: November 20, 2017
Manuscript accepted: November 14, 2017
Manuscript received: November 10, 2017

Cite this article as

Folliguet T. Sutureless aortic valve and TAVI: pros and cons. Minerva Cardioangiol 2018;66:205-12. DOI: 10.23736/S0026-4725.17.04569-8

Corresponding author e-mail

t.folliguet@chru-nancy.fr