Objective To search and review the best clinical evidence to compare the clinical therapeutic effects and safety between TAVR and SAVR, thereby guiding its clinical use and providing references of treatments for such patients. Methods EMbase (1974～2016), MEDLINE (1996～2016) and The Cochrane Library (Issue 5, 2016) were systematically retrieved to collect randomized control trials, case-control studies and meta-analyses. Then, we assessed the quality of all the evidences to develop treatments based on those evidences and the situations of such patients. Results We identified 21 articles, including 2 articles of meta-analysis. With regard to the mortality and incidence of cardiovascular events, TAVR was not worse than SAVR. In addition, TAVR was more dominant than SAVR for patients who combined more basic diseases. Conclusion TAVR is one of the effective treatments for most patients with severe AS after sufficient assessment.
Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a minimally invasive approach to treat symptomatic severe aortic stenosis with surgical taboos or high risk. With the update of the guidelines, the indication of TAVR has been extended to the intermediate-risk aortic stenosis population, and even has a tendency to further expand to the low-risk population. This review highlights the research progress and new evidence of TAVR in respects of patient selection, valve and approach selection, ethnic differences, and surgical complications such as perivalvular leakage, cardiac conduction block, vascular complications, stroke, acute kidney injury, and coronary artery occlusion.
The advent of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has brought up a new treatment option for patients with severe aortic valve disease. However, with the continuous expansion of surgical indications, problems such as structural valve deterioration caused by biological prosthesis have become increasingly prominent. In the newly announced 5-year follow-up results of COMMENCE (SAVR) trial, the aortic bioprosthesis using the new RESILIA biotissue material demonstrated extraordinary clinical safety, efficacy and durability with zero structural valve deterioration and excellent hemodynamic evaluation results. As a result, patients with valvular heart disease have more diverse therapeutic options. However, the choice between surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) and TAVR, biological prosthesis and mechanical prosthesis, etc, has become more and more prominent, which brings more difficulties to clinicians. This paper reviews the research background, 5-year follow-up results of COMMENCE trial and the implications for aortic valve surgery in China.