welcomes you to the new, improved website!This article studied the use of both surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) and transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in patients with low-flow, low-gradient aortic stenosis, including both classical and paradoxical variants of the condition. A total of 131 patients (52 percent) underwent SAVR, while 117 patients (47 percent) underwent TAVR. The outcomes showed comparable results in terms of 20-day mortality, stroke, and the need for pacemaker, suggesting similarities between the two techniques.
You are here:
Outcomes of Surgical Versus Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Low-Flow, Low-Gradient Aortic Stenosis
Submitted by: Mujtaba Mubashir
Source: The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
Keywords:
Author(s): James A. Brown, Eishan Ashwat, Nav Warraich, Nidhi Iyanna, Derek Serna-Gallegos, Dustin Kliner, Catalin Toma, David West, Amber Makani, Irsa Hasan, Takuya Ogami, Danial Ahmad, Floyd Thoma, Yisi Wang, Ibrahim Sultan
1 Comment
Thank you for sharing the summary of the article (I have not access from home, hence I have read the abstract only). However, the conclusion seems somehow excessive “For patients with low-flow, low-gradient aortic stenosis, surgical and transcatheter approaches to aortic valve replacement may be equally as advantageous with respect to long-term outcomes.” Is one year follow-up a long term? In particular considering the higher PVL incidence present in the transcatheter group…