TAVI: New trials and registries offer further welcome evidence – U.S. CoreValve, CHOICE, and GARY

The introduction of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has resulted in a paradigm shift in the treatment of patients with severe aortic stenosis. Data from the recent U.S CoreValve Trial suggest, for the first time, that TAVI is associated with a significantly higher rate of survival at one year compared to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in the treatment of high-risk patients affected by severe aortic stenosis. The present review discusses this study and the current evidence about TAVI, for the treatment of severe aortic stenosis, from major trials and real world registries.

[1]  S. Kaul.  Transcatheter aortic-valve replacement with a self-expanding prosthesis. , 2014, The New England journal of medicine.

[2]  Maurice Buchbinder,et al.  Transcatheter aortic-valve replacement with a self-expanding prosthesis. , 2014, The New England journal of medicine.

[3]  J. Mehilli,et al.  Comparison of balloon-expandable vs self-expandable valves in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement: the CHOICE randomized clinical trial. , 2014, JAMA.

[4]  N. Moat,et al.  Do outcomes from transcatheter aortic valve implantation vary according to access route and valve type? The UK TAVI Registry. , 2014, Journal of interventional cardiology.

[5]  R. Lange,et al.  The German Aortic Valve Registry (GARY): in-hospital outcome , 2013, European heart journal.

[6]  M. Morice,et al.  The transaortic approach for transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a valid alternative to the transapical access in patients with no peripheral vascular option. A single center experience. , 2013, European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery.

[7]  Robert H. Anderson,et al.  A 3-center comparison of 1-year mortality outcomes between transcatheter aortic valve implantation and surgical aortic valve replacement on the basis of propensity score matching among intermediate-risk surgical patients. , 2013, JACC. Cardiovascular interventions.

[8]  B. Prendergast,et al.  The 2011-12 pilot European Sentinel Registry of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: in-hospital results in 4,571 patients. , 2013, EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology.

[9]  P. Serruys,et al.  Transcatheter aortic valve implantation with the Edwards SAPIEN versus the Medtronic CoreValve Revalving system devices: a multicenter collaborative study: the PRAGMATIC Plus Initiative (Pooled-RotterdAm-Milano-Toulouse In Collaboration). , 2012, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[10]  M. Neyt,et al.  Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI): risky and costly , 2012, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[11]  P. Leprince,et al.  Registry of transcatheter aortic-valve implantation in high-risk patients. , 2012, The New England journal of medicine.

[12]  Stuart J Pocock,et al.  Transcatheter versus surgical aortic-valve replacement in high-risk patients. , 2011, The New England journal of medicine.

[13]  P. Serruys,et al.  Standardized endpoint definitions for transcatheter aortic valve implantation clinical trials: a consensus report from the Valve Academic Research Consortium , 2010, European heart journal.

[14]  S. Pocock,et al.  Transcatheter aortic-valve implantation for aortic stenosis in patients who cannot undergo surgery. , 2010, The New England journal of medicine.

[15]  A. Colombo,et al.  Safety and Efficacy of the Subclavian Approach for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation With the CoreValve Revalving System , 2010, Circulation. Cardiovascular interventions.

[16]  Assaf Bash,et al.  Percutaneous Transcatheter Implantation of an Aortic Valve Prosthesis for Calcific Aortic Stenosis: First Human Case Description , 2002, Circulation.