The surgeon's corner

Transapical versus transfemoral aortic valve implantation

EuroIntervention 2011;7:39-40. DOI: 10.4244/EIJV7I1A9

J Robb
J. Daniel Robb, MBBS, MRCP, MRCS; Olaf Wendler*, MD, PhD, FRCS
King’s College Hospital/King’s Health Partners; Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Denmark Hill, London, United Kingdom
Since transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) was pioneered by Alain Cribier in 2002, it has been accepted as an alternative treatment for aortic stenosis. The PARTNER US trial (Cohort B) has demonstrated its superiority compared with medical treatment, in patients thought unsuitable for aortic valve replacement (AVR)1. Cohort A results have demonstrated how TAVI compares to AVR in patients seen at high risk for open heart surgery.

Currently most procedures are performed using a retrograde, transfemoral (TF), or antegrade, transapical (TA), approach. In contrast to TF, where balloon-expandable (Edwards SAPIEN™) and self-expandable (CoreValve™) bioprostheses are commercially available in Europe, TA ...

Sign in to read and download the full article

Forgot your password?

No account yet?
Sign up for free!

Create my pcr account

Join us for free and access thousands of articles from EuroIntervention, as well as presentations, videos, cases from

Read next article
In-stent restenosis: the gold standard has changed

Latest news