Hassanin Ahmed, Szerlip Molly
Banner North Colorado Medical Center, 1801 16th St, Greeley, CO, 80631, USA.
Baylor Scott and White The Heart Hospital Plano, 1100 Allied Dr, Plano, TX, 75093, USA.
Curr Cardiol Rep. 2024 Nov;26(11):1173-1182. doi: 10.1007/s11886-024-02116-4. Epub 2024 Aug 16.
Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement (TAVR) has become the preferred treatment approach for many patients with symptomatic severe aortic valve stenosis (SsAS), particularly those who are deemed at high surgical risk. However, in low-risk surgical patients (LSRP) with SsAS, the choice between TAVR and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) is often a matter of debate and depends on several clinical and anatomical considerations.
Midterm data show similar clinical outcomes and durability of TAVR and SAVR bioprosthetic valves in LRSP. Data on long term durability and outcomes of TAVR in LRSP remains scarce. Both TAVR and SAVR are reasonable options in LRSP with SsAS. Nevertheless, many of these LRSP are expected to outlive their bioprosthetic valves and planning for the second aortic valve replacement should begin at the time of the index procedure with special consideration for coronary re-access, risk for coronary obstruction, and prothesis patient mismatch.
经导管主动脉瓣置换术(TAVR)已成为许多有症状的严重主动脉瓣狭窄(SsAS)患者的首选治疗方法,尤其是那些被认为手术风险高的患者。然而,对于患有SsAS的低手术风险患者(LSRP),TAVR与外科主动脉瓣置换术(SAVR)之间的选择常常存在争议,这取决于多种临床和解剖学因素。
中期数据显示,在LRSP中,TAVR和SAVR生物瓣膜的临床结果和耐用性相似。LRSP中TAVR长期耐用性和结果的数据仍然很少。对于患有SsAS的LRSP,TAVR和SAVR都是合理的选择。尽管如此,这些LRSP中的许多人预计其生物瓣膜的使用寿命会超过他们,因此在初次手术时就应开始规划二次主动脉瓣置换,特别要考虑冠状动脉再次接入、冠状动脉阻塞风险和人工瓣膜与患者不匹配的问题。