Considering aortic valve replacement, we currently live in a tissue valve era. The pressure to avoid any anticoagulation therapy is sustained by the fear of thrombosis or hemorrhagic complications with mechanical valves and by the will of patients to live as normally as before valvular replacement has resulted in a spectacular increase in aortic valve replacement with biological valves in most Western countries.
This tendency is even more prominent since the development of TAVI, which now surpass surgical procedures in the elderly with an amplification effect due to demography. In this context, the durability of the biological valves in the aortic position is a key question to establish an adequate health policy in the matter of aortic valve replacement, especially in younger patients.
During the past few years, the common knowledge about the durability of biological valves has been challenged by the new consensus about the definition of tissue primary failure, the arrival of new prostheses or new technologies on the market, and the contest that biological valves ensure a better long-term survival than mechanical valves in young patients. Therefore medical literature about the durability of biological valves (surgically or via a catheter implanted) has to be updated to this new environment of data evidence.
Considering aortic valve replacement, we currently live in a tissue valve era. The pressure to avoid any anticoagulation therapy is sustained by the fear of thrombosis or hemorrhagic complications with mechanical valves and by the will of patients to live as normally as before valvular replacement has resulted in a spectacular increase in aortic valve replacement with biological valves in most Western countries.
This tendency is even more prominent since the development of TAVI, which now surpass surgical procedures in the elderly with an amplification effect due to demography. In this context, the durability of the biological valves in the aortic position is a key question to establish an adequate health policy in the matter of aortic valve replacement, especially in younger patients.
During the past few years, the common knowledge about the durability of biological valves has been challenged by the new consensus about the definition of tissue primary failure, the arrival of new prostheses or new technologies on the market, and the contest that biological valves ensure a better long-term survival than mechanical valves in young patients. Therefore medical literature about the durability of biological valves (surgically or via a catheter implanted) has to be updated to this new environment of data evidence.