Long-Term Outcomes of Transcatheter vs. Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement

Ten-year follow-up of an “all-comers” randomized trial demonstrates no difference in clinical outcomes between TAVR and SAVR.

Over the past decade, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has evolved from a niche procedure to treat severe aortic stenosis in high-risk patients to a mainstream procedure that is also performed in intermediate- and low-risk patients. With this evolution in practice, the large number of younger patients with life expectancies >10 years now receiving TAVR has raised concerns about its durability and patients' long-term outcomes. Now, 10-year results are available from the NOTION trial of TAVR versus surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) that was conducted between 2009 and 2013 (NEJM JW Cardiol May 29 2015 and J Am Coll Cardiol 2015; 65:2184).

Two hundred eighty patients aged >70 years (mean age, 79 years; mean predicted risk of …

Reviewing Author

David J. Cohen, MD, MSc

Disclosures

Consultant/Advisory BoardMedtronic; Edwards Lifesciences; Abbott Vascular; Boston Scientific; St. Francis Hospital

Speaker’s BureauBoston Scientific; ZOLL Medical

Grant/Research SupportEdwards Lifesciences; Abbott Vascular; Boston Scientific; Corvia Medical; National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; Phillips, Inc.; St. Paul’s Hospital; V-Wave, Inc; ZOLL Medical; CathWorks, ANCORA

Editorial BoardsJACC; American Heart Journal; EuroIntervention; JSCAI; Structural Heart Journal

Leadership Positions in Professional SocietiesSociety of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology TVT Registry (Co-Chair, Risk Model Development Committee); Cardiovascular Research Foundation (Co-Director, TCT Annual Meeting; Co-Director, New York Valves Annual Meeting)