The experience with transcatheter aortic valve replacement is increasing worldwide; however, the incidence of potentially catastrophic cardiac or aortic complications has not decreased. In most cases, significant injuries to the aorta, aortic valve annulus, and left ventricle require open surgical repair. However, the transcatheter aortic valve replacement patient presents a unique challenge as many patients are at high or prohibitive surgical risk and, therefore, an open surgical procedure may not be feasible or appropriate. Consequently, prevention of these potentially catastrophic injuries is vital, and practitioners need to understand when open surgical repair is required and when alternative management strategies can be used. The goal of this article is to provide an overview of current management and prevention strategies for major complications involving the aorta, aortic valve annulus, and left ventricle.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) or replacement (TAVR) was recently approved by the FDA for intermediate risk patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS). This technique was already worldwide adopted for inoperable and high-risk patients. Improved device technology, imaging analysis and operator expertise has reduced the initial worrisome higher complications rate associated with TAVR, making it comparable to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). However, many answers need to be addressed before adoption in lower risk patients. This paper highlights the pros and cons of TAVI based mostly on randomized clinical trials involving the two device platforms approved in the United States. We focused our analysis on metrics that will play a key role in expanding TAVR indication in healthier individuals. We review the significance and gave a perspective on paravalvular leak (PVL), valve performance, valve durability, leaflet thrombosis, stroke and pacemaker requirement.

No abstract

Suprasternal and trans-subclavian access are associated with earlier ambulation and shorter hospitalization than other nontransfemoral TAVR routes, without an increase in complications. Further study is required to determine if suprasternal is the alternative access of choice for TAVR patients with poor transfemoral vasculature.