Skip Navigation


European Heart Journal Advance Access originally published online on April 25, 2008
European Heart Journal 2008 29(11):1339-1341; doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehn180
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
29/11/1339    most recent
ehn180v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Related articles in EHJ
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Antunes, M. J.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Antunes, M. J.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author 2008. For permissions please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Percutaneous aortic valve implantation. The demise of classical aortic valve replacement?

Manuel J. Antunes*

Cardiothoracic Surgery, University Hospital, 3000-075 Coimbra, Portugal

* Corresponding author. Tel: +351 239400418, Fax: +351 239829674, Email: antunes.cct.huc@sapo.pt

This editorial refers to ‘Contemporary surgical or percutaneous management of severe aortic stenosis in the elderly’{dagger} by F. Descoutures et al., on page 1410

Footnotes

The opinions expressed in this article are not necessarily those of the Editors of the European Heart Journal or of the European Society of Cardiology.

{dagger} doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehn081 Back

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

The Paris group of Descoutures et al.1 describe their recent experience with percutaneous aortic valve implantation (PAVI). During a 7-month period they were referred 66 elderly patients (>70 years; mean 83 years) for treatment of severe aortic stenosis (AS). Thirty-nine of these (59%) were judged inoperable or ‘high risk’ for surgery. From this subgroup, 12 (31%) were submitted to PAVI and the remaining 27, who were deemed unsuitable for this procedure, were either treated medically (16 patients) or had a catheter balloon dilatation (inappropriately termed valvuloplasty by the authors—seven patients). Perhaps ironically, the last four of these patients, initially deemed inoperable or high risk, were later submitted to classical aortic valve replacement (AVR), because the surgical risk was considered ‘high but not prohibitive’. Two . . . [Full Text of this Article]


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?

Related articles in EHJ:

Contemporary surgical or percutaneous management of severe aortic stenosis in the elderly
Fleur Descoutures, Dominique Himbert, Laurent Lepage, Bernard Iung, Delphine Détaint, Didier Tchetche, Eric Brochet, Yves Castier, Jean-Pol Depoix, Patrick Nataf, and Alec Vahanian
EHJ 2008 29: 1410-1417. [Abstract] [Full Text]