Heart Center, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Denmark.
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016 Nov 14;9(21):2183-2185. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2016.08.015. Epub 2016 Oct 12.
During the last decade transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has been established as a treatment for patients with severe aortic stenosis, who are at particularly high surgical risk. As compared with surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR), TAVR has been associated with lower early risk of mortality, atrial fibrillation, acute kidney injury, and bleeding. Furthermore, device and periprocedural improvements have addressed most of the initial limitations for TAVR, including the Achilles' heel, paravalvular leakage. Supported by this as well as preliminary data among lower-risk patients, TAVR is currently being evaluated in prospective randomized trials against SAVR in younger low-risk patients. Although durability of the TAVR device may be of concern in younger patients given their longer life expectancy, intermediate-term controlled data does not reveal any difference between TAVR and SAVR devices.
在过去的十年中,经导管主动脉瓣置换术(TAVR)已被确立为一种治疗严重主动脉瓣狭窄患者的方法,这些患者的手术风险特别高。与外科主动脉瓣置换术(SAVR)相比,TAVR 的早期死亡率、心房颤动、急性肾损伤和出血风险较低。此外,设备和围手术期的改进解决了 TAVR 的大多数初始限制,包括其弱点,瓣周漏。在这些改进的基础上,以及在较低风险患者的初步数据的支持下,TAVR 目前正在前瞻性随机试验中与 SAVR 进行比较,以评估在年轻低风险患者中的效果。尽管鉴于年轻患者的预期寿命更长,TAVR 设备的耐久性可能是一个问题,但中期对照数据并未显示 TAVR 和 SAVR 设备之间存在任何差异。