Transcatheter Valve-in-Valve Versus Surgical Replacement of Failing Stented Aortic Biological Valves

This retrospective study by Sedeek et al aimed to compare the outcomes of patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) valve-in-valve (n=90) versus surgical replacement (SAVR) (n=260) of failing stented aortic biological valves in a cohort of 350 patients . They demonstrated that despite the TAVR-in-valve cohort being older and having a higher prevalence of comorbidities and STS PROM, they had fewer perioperative complications and shorter hospital stay; however, patient-to-prosthesis mismatch was more common after TAVR-in-valve (44% vs SAVR 12%, P < .001). Overall, their results suggest that TAVR valve-in-valve and repeat SAVR have comparable operative and mid-term mortality, with SAVR being associated with a superior hemodynamic profile compared to TAVR valve-in-valve with less patient-to-prosthesis mismatch.