The two main modalities used for congenital aortic valvular stenosis (AVS) treatment are balloon aortic valve dilatation (BAD) and surgical aortic valvuloplasty (SAV). This study evaluates residual and recurrent stenosis, aortic regurgitation (AR) development/progression, reintervention rates, and the risk factors associated with this end point in patients with non-critical congenital AVS who underwent BAD or SAV after up to 18 years of follow-up. From 1990 to 2017, 70 consecutive interventions were performed in patients with AVS, and 61 were included in this study (33 BADs and 28 SAVs). There were no significant differences in age, sex distribution, PSIG, and AR frequency between the BAD and SAV groups. Bicuspid valve morphology was more common in the BAD group than the SAV group. There was no statistically significant difference between PSIGs and AR development or progression after intervention at the immediate postoperative echocardiography of patients who underwent BAD or SAV (p = 0.82 vs. p = 0.29). Patients were followed 6.9 ± 5.1 years after intervention. The follow-up period in the SAV group was longer than that of the BAD group (9.5 ± 5.4 vs. 5.5 ± 4.4 years, p = 0.003). There was no statistically significant difference in the last echocardiographic PSIG between patients who underwent SAV or BAD (51.1 ± 33.5 vs. 57.3 ± 35.1, p = 0.659). Freedom from reintervention was 81.3% at 5 years and 57.5% at 10 years in the BAD group and 95.5% at 5 years and 81.8% at 10 years in the SAV group, respectively (p = 0.044). There was no difference in postprocedural immediate PSIG and last PSIG at follow-up and the development/progression of AR between patients who were treated with BAD versus SAV. However, long-term results of SAV were superior to those of BAD, with a somewhat prolonged reintervention interval.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation is a suitable therapeutic intervention for patients deemed inoperable or high risk for surgical aortic valve replacement. Current investigations question whether it is a suitable alternative to surgery for intermediate- and low-risk patients. The following meta-analysis presents a comparison between transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in patients that are intermediate and low risk for surgery. Articles were collected via an electronic search using Google Scholar and PubMed. Articles of interest included studies comparing the survival of intermediate- and low-risk patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation to those undergoing surgical aortic valve replacement. Primary end points included 1-, 2-, and 3-year survival. Secondary end points included postintervention thromboembolic events, stroke, transient ischemic attacks, major vascular complications, permanent pacemaker implantation, life-threatening bleeding, acute kidney injury, atrial fibrillation, and moderate-to-severe aortic regurgitation. Six studies met the criteria for the meta-analysis. One- and two-year survival comparisons showed no difference between the two interventions. Surgical aortic valve replacement, however, presented with favorable 3-year survival compared with the transcatheter approach. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation had more major vascular complications, permanent pacemaker implantation, and moderate-to-severe aortic regurgitation rates compared with surgery. Surgical aortic valve replacement presented more life-threatening bleeding, acute kidney injury, and atrial fibrillation compared with a transcatheter approach. There was no statistical difference between the two approaches in terms of thromboembolic events, strokes, or transient ischemic attack rates. Surgical aortic valve replacement presents favorable 3-year survival rates compared with transcatheter aortic valve implantation.