It’s not fair to compare transcatheter aortic valve implantation with surgical replacement

Abstract

Surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) is still class I recommendation for the treatment of patients with symptomatic severe aortic valve stenosis(AS) according to recent guidelines. Although it assumed as one of the most succesful intervention of cardiac surgery; currently the transcatheter technique (transcatheter aortic valve replacement-TAVR) has came into notice as a feasible and effective option to treat high risk or inoperable aortic stenosis patients. New reports have been publishing comparison of these two techniques by numbers increasing with this technology1. On the stage, we would like to discuss about fairness of the comparison mentality in terms of a feature-by-feature style.

Comparison of anesthesia management in transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a retrospective cohort study

“… 3 , 4 , 5 Surgical aortic valve replacement (AVR) and transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) are the methods used in the treatment of aortic stenosis. 6 , 7 TAVI is an up-to-date treatment approach that is frequently preferred because it is less invasive than AVR, which is a superior surgical method compared to medical treatment. 7…”