6 In addition to the exclusion criteria shown in Table 1, these patients were expected to have a score of at least 10% on the Society of selleck screening library Thoracic Surgeons

risk model. The predicted surgical mortality for the patients enrolled was 11.8%. The results of this study documented an “as treated” 30-day mortality of 5.2% for TAVI and 8.0 % for AVR, a nonsignificant difference (P=0.15). Survival at 1 year was also similar: TAVI 24.2%, AVR 26.8% (P=0.44). The stroke rate at 30 days was 5.5% for TAVI and 2.4% for AVR, a significant difference (P=0.04), and at 1 year it was 8.3% vs. 4.3% (P=0.04). At 30 days post-operatively, gradient reduction was similar, and significant Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical periprosthethic leaks were present in 12.2% of TAVI patients vs. 0.9% for AVR. The seriousness

of the occurrence of moderate Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical or severe regurgitation after TAVI was recently reported by Sinning et al. in 108 consecutive patients.7 At 2 years of follow-up, overall mortality was 31.4%. Patients with no residual aortic paravalvular regurgitation had a mortality of 18%; it was 31% with grade 1 and 67% with grade ≥2 aortic regurgitation. They concluded that moderate to severe periprosthetic aortic regurgitation is a strong predictor of adverse short and midterm outcome after TAVI. In the U.K. TAVI Registry report, moderate to severe aortic insufficiency was reported to be an important univariate Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical and multivariate predictor of mortality at 1 year.8 Thus significant periprosthetic aortic insufficiency is established Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical as a serious complication and occurs in a significant proportion of patients undergoing TAVI. A little-noted but important problem in the design of the high-risk portion

of the Cohort A PARTNER Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical study was the inclusion of patients who had undergone previous coronary artery bypass surgery (CAB). Therapy by catheter does not involve a redo chest surgical procedure. The death rate at 1 year in the patients undergoing redo chest AVR after CAB was 19.1% (29 of 152), and the death rate in patients older than 85 years was 26.1%. These figures are high for surgical patients and disproportionately affected the overall surgical mortality. Stortecky et al. compared TAVI vs. AVR in patients with aortic stenosis mafosfamide and a previous CAB, and they reported a perioperative mortality for AVR after CAB of 2.5%.9 Thus, in terms of an unbiased comparison of TAVI and isolated aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis, the CAB patients would have been better omitted. Results of Conventional AVR in Patients Similar to the PARTNER Trial Cohort A (High-Risk Group) At the American Heart Association 2008 annual meeting, I reported on the risk of AVR in 1,223 of my patients, of whom 203 were older than 80 years of age.10 This data was updated in 2011 to include 1,514 patients operated on in our surgical service.