Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Outcomes, Indications, Complications, and Innovations

  • Valvular Heart Disease (J Dal-Bianco, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Treatment Options in Cardiovascular Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Opinion statement

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has become the standard of care for the treatment of severe aortic stenosis in individuals who are at prohibitive surgical risk and presents a viable alternative to surgery in selected patients who are at high operative risk. To date, outcomes from the PARTNER (Placement of AoRtic TraNscathetER Valve) and Medtronic CoreValve® US Pivotal trials continue to show the benefits of TAVR in these high-risk subgroups out to 5 and 3 years, respectively (as reported by Mack et al. Lancet. 85:2477–2484 2015; Kapadia et al. Lancet. 385:2485–2491 2015; Deeb et al. J Am Coll Cardiol. 67:2565–2574 2016). Furthermore, the recent release of the PARTNER-2 and SURTAVI trial results among other international data suggest that clinical outcomes for intermediate risk patients may be promising for TAVR compared to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) (as reported by Leon et al. N Engl J Med. 374:1609–1620 2016; Reardon et al. N Engl J Med. 376:1321–1331 2017). However, several questions persist regarding TAVR-specific complications as well as long-term durability. Paravalvular regurgitation, permanent pacemaker implantation, stroke, vascular access injury, and renal failure in post-TAVR patients remain adversaries in the quest to perfect this groundbreaking, game-changing technology (as reported by Khatri et al. Ann Intern Med. 158:35–46 2013). In this review, we provide an up-to-date synopsis of results from landmark clinical trials that cumulatively attest to the comparability of TAVR to best medical therapy and SAVR in extreme-risk, high-risk, and intermediate-risk patient populations. We continue with a review of studies that seek to compare transcatheter vs. surgical valve implantation in lower-risk subgroups. We also introduce ongoing efforts to optimize the peri-procedural management of TAVR and conclude with a presentation of management strategies and new generation valve platforms that seek to address some of the current limitations of transcatheter valve implantation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References and Recommended Reading

  1. Otto CM, Prendergast B. Aortic-valve stenosis—from patients at risk to severe valve obstruction. N Engl J Med. 2014;371:744–56.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Schwarz F, Baumann P, Manthey J, et al. The effect of aortic valve replacement on survival. Circulation. 1982;66:1105–10.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Vasques F, Messori A, Lucenteforte E, Biancari F. Immediate and late outcome of patients aged 80 years and older undergoing isolated aortic valve replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 48 studies. Am Heart J. 2012;163:477–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Hamm CW, Arsalan M, Mack MJ. The future of transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Eur Heart J. 2016;37:803–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Makkar RR, Fontana GP, Jilaihawi H, et al. Transcatheter aortic-valve replacement for inoperable severe aortic stenosis. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:1696–704.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Kodali SK, Williams MR, Smith CR, et al. Two-year outcomes after transcatheter or surgical aortic-valve replacement. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:1686–95.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Popma JJ, Adams DH, Reardon MJ, et al. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement using a self-expanding bioprosthesis in patients with severe aortic stenosis at extreme risk for surgery. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63:1972–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Adams DH, Popma JJ, Reardon MJ, et al. Transcatheter aortic-valve replacement with a self-expanding prosthesis. N Engl J Med. 2014;370:1790–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Reynolds MR, Magnuson EA, Wang K, et al. Health-related quality of life after transcatheter or surgical aortic valve replacement in high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis: results from the PARTNER (Placement of AoRTic TraNscathetER valve) trial (cohort a). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;60:548–58.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Arnold SV, Reynolds MR, Wang K, et al. Health status after transcatheter or surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with severe aortic stenosis at increased surgical risk: results from the CoreValve US pivotal trial. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;8:1207–17.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Reynolds MR, Magnuson EA, Lei Y, et al. Cost-effectiveness of transcatheter aortic valve replacement compared with surgical aortic valve replacement in high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis: results of the PARTNER (Placement of AoRTic TraNscathetER valve) trial (cohort a). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;60:2683–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Reynolds MR, Lei Y, Wang K, et al. Cost-effectiveness of transcatheter aortic valve replacement with a self-expanding prosthesis versus surgical aortic valve replacement. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016;67:29–38.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Khatri PJ, Webb JG, Rodés-Cabau J, et al. Adverse effects associated with transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a meta-analysis of contemporary studies. Ann Intern Med. 2013;158:35–46.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Figulla HR, Webb JG, Lauten A, Feldman T. The transcatheter valve technology pipeline for treatment of adult valvular heart disease. Eur Heart J. 2016;37:2226–39.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Leon MB, Smith CR, Mack MJ, et al. Transcatheter or surgical aortic-valve replacement in intermediate-risk patients. N Engl J Med. 2016;374:1609–20.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Hahn RT, Little SH, Monaghan MJ, et al. Recommendations for comprehensive intraprocedural echocardiographic imaging during TAVR. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015;8:261–87.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Willson AB, Webb JG, LaBounty TM, et al. 3-dimensional aortic annular assessment by multidetector computed tomography predicts moderate or severe paravalvular regurgitation after transcatheter aortic valve replacement. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;59:1287–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Jilaihawi H, Kashif M, Fontana G, et al. Cross-sectional computed tomographic assessment improves accuracy of aortic annular sizing for transcatheter aortic valve replacement and reduces the incidence of paravalvular aortic regurgitation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;59:1275–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Jilaihawi H, Doctor N, Kashif M, et al. Aortic annular sizing for transcatheter aortic valve replacement using cross-sectional 3-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;61:908–16.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Binder RK, Webb JG, Willson AB, et al. The impact of integration of a multidetector computed tomography annulus area sizing algorithm on outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a prospective, multicenter, controlled trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;62:431–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Bartel T, Bonaros N, Müller L, et al. Intracardiac echocardiography: a new guiding tool for transcatheter aortic valve replacement. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2011;24:966–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Ussia GP, Barbanti M, Sarkar K, et al. Accuracy of intracardiac echocardiography for aortic root assessment in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Am Heart J. 2012;163:684–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Bartel T, Bonaros N, Edlinger M, et al. Intracardiac echo and reduced radiocontrast requirements during TAVR. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2014;7:319–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Mack MJ, Leon MB, Smith CR, et al. 5-year outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement or surgical aortic valve replacement for high surgical risk patients with aortic stenosis (PARTNER 1): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2015;385:2477–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Kapadia SR, Leon MB, Makkar RR, et al. 5-year outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement compared with standard treatment for patients with inoperable aortic stenosis (PARTNER 1): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2015;385:2485–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Yakubov SJ, Adams DH, Watson DR, et al. 2-year outcomes after iliofemoral self-expanding transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients with severe aortic stenosis deemed extreme risk for surgery. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;66:1327–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Reardon MJ, Adams DH, Kleiman NS, et al. 2-year outcomes in patients undergoing surgical or self-expanding transcatheter aortic valve replacement. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;66:113–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Deeb GM, Reardon MJ, Chetcuti S, et al. 3-year outcomes in high-risk patients who underwent surgical or transcatheter aortic valve replacement. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016;67:2565–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Latib A, Maisano F, Bertoldi L, et al. Transcatheter vs surgical aortic valve replacement in intermediate-surgical-risk patients with aortic stenosis: a propensity score-matched case-control study. Am Heart J. 2012;164:910–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Piazza N, Kalesan B, Van Mieghem N, 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. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2013;6:443–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Tamburino C, Barbanti M, D'Errigo P, et al. 1-year outcomes after transfemoral transcatheter or surgical aortic valve replacement: results from the Italian OBSERVANT study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;66:804–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. D'Errigo P, Barbanti M, Ranucci M, et al. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation versus surgical aortic valve replacement for severe aortic stenosis: results from an intermediate risk propensity-matched population of the Italian OBSERVANT study. Int J Cardiol. 2013;167:1945–1952.

  33. Thyregod HG, Søndergaard L, Ihlemann N, et al. The Nordic aortic valve intervention (NOTION) trial comparing transcatheter versus surgical valve implantation: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial. Trials. 2013;14:11.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Thyregod HG, Steinbrüchel DA, Ihlemann N, et al. Transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with severe aortic valve stenosis: 1-year results from the all-comers NOTION randomized clinical trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;65:2184–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Søndergaard L, Steinbrüchel DA, Ihlemann N, et al. Two-year outcomes in patients with severe aortic valve stenosis randomized to transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement: the all-comers Nordic aortic valve intervention randomized clinical trial. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;9:e003665.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Thourani VH, Kodali S, Makkar RR, et al. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement versus surgical valve replacement in intermediate-risk patients: a propensity score analysis. Lancet. 2016;387:2218–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Reardon MJ, Van Mieghem NM, Popma JJ, et al. Surgical or transcatheter aortic-valve replacement in intermediate-risk patients. N Engl J Med. 2017;376:1321–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Sinhal A, Altwegg L, Pasupati S, et al. Atrioventricular block after transcatheter balloon expandable aortic valve implantation. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2008;1:305–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Moreno R, Dobarro D, López de Sá E, et al. Cause of complete atrioventricular block after percutaneous aortic valve implantation: insights from a necropsy study. Circulation 2009;120:e29–e30.

  40. Abdel-Wahab M, Neumann F-J, Mehilli J, et al. 1-year outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement with balloon-expandable versus self-expandable valves: results from the CHOICE randomized clinical trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;66:791–800.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Erkapic D, De Rosa S, Kelava A, et al. Risk for permanent pacemaker after transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a comprehensive analysis of the literature. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2012;23:391–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Manoharan G, Walton AS, Brecker SJ, et al. Treatment of symptomatic severe aortic stenosis with a novel resheathable supra-annular self-expanding transcatheter aortic valve system. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;8:1359–67.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Nazif TM, Dizon JM, Hahn RT, et al. Predictors and clinical outcomes of permanent pacemaker implantation after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: the PARTNER (Placement of AoRtic TraNscathetER valve) trial and registry. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;8:60–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Urena M, Webb JG, Tamburino C, et al. Permanent pacemaker implantation after transcatheter aortic valve implantation: impact on late clinical outcomes and left ventricular function. Circulation. 2014;129:1233–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Hayashida K, Lefèvre T, Chevalier B, et al. Impact of post-procedural aortic regurgitation on mortality after transcatheter aortic valve implantation. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2012;5:1247–56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Athappan G, Patvardhan E, Tuzcu EM, et al. Incidence, predictors, and outcomes of aortic regurgitation after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: meta-analysis and systematic review of literature. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;61:1585–95.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Kodali S, Pibarot P, Douglas PS, et al. Paravalvular regurgitation after transcatheter aortic valve replacement with the Edwards Sapien valve in the PARTNER trial: characterizing patients and impact on outcomes. Eur Heart J. 2015;36:449–56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Sinning JM, Hammerstingl C, Vasa-Nicotera M, et al. Aortic regurgitation index defines severity of peri-prosthetic regurgitation and predicts outcome in patients after transcatheter aortic valve implantation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;59:1134–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Sinning JM, Vasa-Nicotera M, Chin D, et al. Evaluation and management of paravalvular aortic regurgitation after transcatheter aortic valve replacement. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;62:11–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Takagi K, Latib A, Al-Lamee R, et al. Predictors of moderate-to-severe paravalvular aortic regurgitation immediately after corevalve implantation and the impact of postdilatation. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2011;78:432–43.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Stundl A, Rademacher M-C, Descoups C, et al. Balloon post-dilation and valve-in-valve implantation for the reduction of paravalvular leakage with use of the self-expanding CoreValve prosthesis. EuroIntervention. 2016;11:1140–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Rihal CS, Sorajja P, Booker JD, et al. Principles of percutaneous paravalvular leak closure. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2012;5:121–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Saia F, Martinez C, Gafoor S, et al. Long-term outcomes of percutaneous paravalvular regurgitation closure after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a multicenter experience. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;8:681–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Kapadia S, Agarwal S, Miller DC, et al. Insights into timing, risk factors, and outcomes of stroke and transient ischemic attack after transcatheter aortic valve replacement in the PARTNER trial (Placement of AoRtic TraNscathetER valve). Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;9:e002981.

  55. Kleiman NS, Maini BJ, Reardon MJ, et al. Neurological events following transcatheter aortic valve replacement and their predictors: a report from the CoreValve trials. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;9:e003551.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Van Mieghem NM, Schipper ME, Ladich E, et al. Histopathology of embolic debris captured during transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Circulation. 2013;127:2194–201.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Van Mieghem NM, El Faquir N, Rahhab Z, et al. Incidence and predictors of debris embolizing to the brain during transcatheter aortic valve implantation. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;8:718–24.

  58. Uddin A, Fairbairn TA, Djoukhader IK, et al. Consequence of cerebral embolism after transcatheter aortic valve implantation compared with contemporary surgical aortic valve replacement: effect on health-related quality of life. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;8:e001913.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Rodés-Cabau J, Kahlert P, Neumann FJ, et al. Feasibility and exploratory efficacy evaluation of the Embrella Embolic Deflector system for the prevention of cerebral emboli in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement: the PROTAVI-C pilot study. JACC Cardiovac Interv. 2014;7:1146–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Lansky AJ, Schofer J, Tchetche D, et al. A prospective randomized evaluation of the TriGuard™ HDH embolic DEFLECTion device during transcatheter aortic valve implantation: results from the DEFLECT III trial. Eur Heart J. 2015;36:2070–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Haussig S, Mangner N, Dwyer MG, et al. Effect of a cerebral protection device on brain lesions following transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients with severe aortic stenosis. JAMA. 2016;316:592–601.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Willson AB, Rodés-Cabau J, Wood DA, et al. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement with the St. Jude Medical Portico valve: first-in-human experience. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;60:581–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Makkar RR, Fontana G, Jilaihawi H, et al. Possible subclinical leaflet thrombosis in bioprosthetic aortic valves. N Engl J Med. 2015;373:2015–24.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Meredith IT, Worthley SG, Whitbourn RJ, et al. Transfemoral aortic valve replacement with the repositionable Lotus Valve System in high surgical risk patients: the REPRISE I study. EuroIntervention. 2014;9:1264–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Meredith IT, Walters DL, Dumonteil N, et al. 1-year outcomes with the fully repositionable and retrievable Lotus transcatheter aortic replacement valve in 120 high-risk surgical patients with severe aortic stenosis: results of the REPRISE II study. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;9:376–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Schofer J, Colombo A, Klugmann S, et al. Prospective multicenter evaluation of the direct flow medical transcatheter aortic valve. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63:763–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Lefèvre T, Colombo A, Tchetche D, et al. Prospective multicenter evaluation of the direct flow medical transcatheter aortic valve system: 12-month outcomes of the evaluation of the direct flow medical percutaneous aortic valve 18F system for the treatment of patients with severe aortic stenosis (DISCOVER) study. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;9:68–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Wiegerinck EM, Boerlage-van Dijk K, Koch KT, et al. Towards minimally invasiveness: transcatheter aortic valve implantation under local analgesia exclusively. Int J Cardiol. 2014;176:1050–2.

  69. Attizzani GF, Ohno Y, Latib A, et al. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation under angiographic guidance with and without adjunctive transesophageal echocardiography. Am J Cardiol. 2015;116:604–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Jensen HA, Condado JF, Devireddy C, et al. Minimalist transcatheter aortic valve replacement: the new standard for surgeons and cardiologists using transfemoral access? J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2015;150:833–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Dehédin B, Guinot PG, Ibrahim H, et al. Anesthesia and perioperative management of patients who undergo transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation: an observational study of general versus local/regional anesthesia in 125 consecutive patients. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2011;25:1036–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Yamamoto M, Meguro K, Mouillet G, et al. Effect of local anesthetic management with conscious sedation in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Am J Cardiol. 2013;111:94–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Dall'Ara G, Eltchaninoff H, Moat N, et al. Local and general anaesthesia do not influence outcome of transfemoral aortic valve implantation. 2014;177:448–54.

  74. Brecker SJ, Bleiziffer S, Bosmans J, et al. Impact of anesthesia type on outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (from the multicenter ADVANCE study). Am J Cardiol. 2016;117:1332–8.

  75. Babaliaros V, Devireddy C, Lerakis S, et al. Comparison of transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement performed in the catheterization laboratory (minimalist approach) versus hybrid operating room (standard approach): outcomes and cost analysis. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2014;7:898–904.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Verma S, Siu SC. Aortic dilatation in patients with bicuspid aortic valve. N Engl J Med. 2014;370:1920–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Praz F, Windecker S, Huber C, et al. Expanding indications of transcatheter heart valve interventions. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;8:1777–96.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Wijesinghe N, Ye J, Rodés-Cabau J, et al. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients with bicuspid aortic valve stenosis. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2010;3:1122–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Himbert D, Pontnau F, Messika-Zeitoun D, et al. Feasibility and outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve implantation in high-risk patients with stenotic bicuspid aortic valves. Am J Cardiol. 2012;110:877–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Bauer T, Linke A, Sievert H, et al. Comparison of the effectiveness of transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients with stenotic bicuspid versus tricuspid aortic valves (from the German TAVI registry). Am J Cardiol. 2014;113:518–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Kochman J, Huczek Z, Scisło P, et al. Comparison of 1- and 12-month outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients with severely stenotic bicuspid versus tricuspid aortic valves (results from a multicenter registry). Am J Cardiol. 2014;114:757–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Costopoulos C, Latib A, Maisano F, et al. Comparison of results of transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients with severely stenotic bicuspid versus tricuspid or nonbicuspid valves. Am J Cardiol. 2014;113:1390–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Yoon SH, Lefèvre T, Ahn JM, et al. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement with early and new-generation devices in bicuspid aortic valve stenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016;68:1195–205.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Perlman GY, Blanke P, Dvir D, et al. Bicuspid aortic valve stenosis: favorable early outcomes with a next-generation transcatheter heart valve in a multicenter study. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;9:817–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Wenaweser P, Buellesfeld L, Gerckens U, Grube E. Percutaneous aortic valve replacement for severe aortic regurgitation in degenerated bioprosthesis: the first valve in valve procedure using the CoreValve Revalving system. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2007;70:760–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Raval J, Nagaraja V, Eslick GD, Denniss AR. Transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation: a systematic review of literature. Heart Lung Circ. 2014;23:1020–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Dvir D, Webb JG, Bleiziffer S, et al. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation in failed bioprosthetic surgical valves. JAMA. 2014;312:162–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Gonska B, Seeger J, Rodewald C, et al. Transfemoral valve-in-valve implantation for degenerated bioprosthetic aortic valves using the new balloon-expandable Edwards Sapien 3 valve. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;88:636–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Piazza N, Bleiziffer S, Brockmann G, et al. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation for failing surgical aortic bioprosthetic valve: from concept to clinical application and evaluation (part 1). JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2011;4:721–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Dvir D, Webb JG. Transcatheter aortic valve-in-valve implantation for patients with degenerative surgical bioprosthetic valves. Circ J. 2015;79:695–703.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Cardiology Division, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit Street, GRB8-852E, Boston, MA, 02114, USA

    Michael N. Young MD & Ignacio Inglessis MD

Authors
  1. Michael N. Young MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ignacio Inglessis MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ignacio Inglessis MD.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of Interest

Michael N. Young and Ignacio Inglessis each declare no potential conflicts of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Valvular Heart Disease

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Young, M.N., Inglessis, I. Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Outcomes, Indications, Complications, and Innovations. Curr Treat Options Cardio Med 19, 81 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11936-017-0580-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11936-017-0580-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation