Transcatheter Valve-in-Valve Versus Surgical Replacement of Failing Stented Aortic Biological Valves [1]
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.