English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

During the last decade, transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has represented a valid alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with aortic stenosis and elevated surgical risk. Recent randomized clinical trials reported excellent results also for patients at low surgical risk, but in clinical practice, the mean age of the patients treated remain over 75 years, and the presence of a bicuspid aortic valve still represents an important exclusion criteria. Today, aortic valve replacement with a mechanical prosthesis remains the treatment of choice for young adults with aortic stenosis, although the desire to avoid oral anticoagulants drives more patients younger than 65 years of age towards biological prostheses. Furthermore, despite the follow-up of patients after TAVI is still limited to a few years, the opportunity of a second percutaneous treatment (TAVI-in-TAVI), extends the scope of percutaneous strategy. In the next few years, TAVI has to face many challenges to become a valid alternative to surgery in the younger patients as well.

Severe aortic stenosis in the young, with or without bicuspid valve: is transcatheter aortic valve implantation the first choice?