Related Experiment Video
Updated: Apr 1, 2026

Technique and Patient Selection Criteria of Right Anterior Mini-Thoracotomy for Minimal Access Aortic Valve Replacement
Published on: March 26, 2018
Transcatheter or Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Prior Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting
John V Conte1, Thomas G Gleason2, Jon R Resar3
1Department of Surgery, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland.
Insights
Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) shows improved survival trends and reduced morbidity compared to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients with prior coronary artery bypass graft surgery and aortic stenosis.
Area of Science:
- Cardiovascular Medicine
- Interventional Cardiology
- Cardiac Surgery
Background:
- Aortic stenosis (AS) management in patients with prior coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery presents unique challenges.
- Both transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) are viable treatment options for this population.
- The CoreValve High Risk (CHR) study provides valuable data on clinical outcomes for these patients.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the major clinical outcomes of TAVR versus SAVR in patients with AS and prior CABG surgery.
- To assess 1-year all-cause mortality and other critical secondary endpoints.
- To identify predictors of mortality in this high-risk cohort.
Main Methods:
- Analysis of 226 patients from the CHR study with prior CABG surgery, undergoing either TAVR (n=115) or SAVR (n=111).
- Primary endpoint: 1-year all-cause mortality.
- Secondary endpoints included cardiovascular mortality, stroke, length of stay, acute kidney injury, bleeding events, and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE).
Main Results:
- At 1-year follow-up, TAVR showed a trend towards lower all-cause mortality (9.6% vs. 18.1%, p=0.06) and cardiovascular mortality (7.0% vs. 13.8%, p=0.09) compared to SAVR.
- High Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) risk score (>7) and age (>80) predicted mortality, with TAVR demonstrating a survival advantage (p=0.03).
- SAVR was associated with longer ICU/hospital stays, increased acute kidney injury, life-threatening bleeding, and MACCE (p < 0.05), while TAVR had higher rates of pacemaker implantation and paravalvular regurgitation.
Conclusions:
- For patients with AS and prior CABG, TAVR offers a significant advantage in reducing morbidity compared to SAVR.
- TAVR demonstrates a strong trend towards improved survival at 1 year in this specific patient group.
- These findings support TAVR as a favorable alternative for select high-risk patients with aortic stenosis and prior bypass surgery.
Background:
Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) are treatment options for aortic stenosis in patients with prior coronary artery bypass graft surgery. We assessed the major clinical outcomes of such patients enrolled in the CoreValve High Risk (CHR) study.
Methods:
Of the 795 CHR study patients, 226 had prior coronary artery bypass graft surgery; 115 underwent TAVR and 111 underwent SAVR. The primary endpoint was a comparison of all-cause mortality at 1 year. Important secondary clinical endpoints were assessed.
Results:
At 1 year, all-cause mortality was 9.6% for TAVR versus 18.1% for SAVR (p = 0.06); cardiovascular mortality was 7.0% for TAVR versus 13.8% for SAVR (p = 0.09). A combination of The Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk score greater than 7 and age greater than 80 years was a significant predictor of mortality, with TAVR demonstrating a survival advantage (p = 0.03). No differences were seen for stroke. The SAVR group had longer intensive care unit and hospital stays, increased incidence of acute kidney injury, life-threatening or disabling bleeding, and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (p < 0.05). Pacemaker implantation and paravalvular regurgitation were greater with TAVR at all timepoints.
Conclusions:
For patients with prior coronary artery bypass graft surgery and aortic stenosis, TAVR offers a significant morbidity advantage and a strong trend toward improved survival over SAVR at 1 year.
Related Concept Videos
Aortic Regurgitation III: Medical Management
Coronary Artery Disease V: Interprofessional Care
Mitral Stenosis III: Medical Management

