Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 15, 2025

Technique and Patient Selection Criteria of Right Anterior Mini-Thoracotomy for Minimal Access Aortic Valve Replacement
Published on: March 26, 2018
Aortic Stenosis With Coronary Artery Disease: SAVR or TAVR-When and How?
Juan Hernando Del Portillo1, Julio Farjat-Pasos1, Attilio Galhardo1
1Quebec Heart and Lung Institute, Laval University, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada.
Insights
For severe aortic stenosis and coronary artery disease, surgical aortic valve replacement with bypass grafting is best for complex cases. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement with intervention suits high-risk patients.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Interventional Cardiology
- Cardiac Surgery
Background:
- Increasing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) candidates with severe aortic stenosis (AS) also have coronary artery disease (CAD).
- Optimal revascularization strategies for concurrent AS and CAD require careful consideration due to potential impacts on outcomes.
- Prevalence of concurrent AS and CAD varies based on definitions and study populations.
Purpose of the Study:
- To define the appropriate revascularization strategy for patients with concomitant severe aortic stenosis and coronary artery disease.
- To compare outcomes of different revascularization approaches in this patient group.
- To identify factors influencing the choice between TAVR+PCI and SAVR+CABG.
Main Methods:
- Review of existing literature comparing surgical aortic valve replacement with coronary artery bypass grafting (SAVR+CABG) versus transcatheter aortic valve replacement with percutaneous coronary intervention (TAVR+PCI).
- Analysis of outcomes including mortality, stroke, and major cardiovascular events based on CAD complexity and surgical risk.
- Consideration of factors like PCI timing, ejection fraction, and valve durability.
Main Results:
- SAVR+CABG shows favorable long-term prognosis.
- TAVR+PCI outcomes depend on CAD complexity and revascularization completeness.
- No significant differences in mortality or stroke between SAVR+CABG and TAVR+PCI in low-intermediate risk/CAD patients.
- SAVR+CABG may offer lower major cardiovascular events in complex CAD patients.
Conclusions:
- SAVR+CABG is preferred for low-intermediate surgical risk patients with complex CAD.
- TAVR+PCI is suitable for high surgical risk patients needing complete or reasonable incomplete revascularization.
- Further research is needed on alternative CAD assessment methods for guiding revascularization in severe AS patients.
Abstract:
The growing number of candidates for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has increased the interest in the concomitant presence of coronary artery disease (CAD) and severe aortic stenosis (AS), prompting the need to define the appropriate revascularization strategy for each case. The reported prevalence of concurrent AS and CAD has varied over the years on the basis of the CAD definition and the population evaluated. Revascularization for treating CAD in patients with severe AS involves additional interventions that could impact outcomes. The addition of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) has demonstrated favourable effects on long-term prognosis, while the impact of adding percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) to TAVR may depend on the CAD complexity and the feasibility of achieving complete or reasonably incomplete revascularization. Furthermore, the comparison between SAVR+CABG and TAVR+PCI in low-intermediate surgical risk and low-intermediate complex CAD patients did not reveal differences in all-cause mortality or stroke between the groups. However, there is some evidence showing a lower incidence of major cardiovascular events with the SAVR+CABG strategy for patients with complex CAD. Thus, SAVR+CABG seems to be the best option for patients with low-intermediate surgical risk and complex CAD, and TAVR+PCI for high surgical risk patients seeking complete and/or reasonable incomplete revascularization. After deciding between TAVR+PCI or SAVR+CABG, factors such as timing for PCI, low ejection fraction, coronary reaccess, and valve durability must be considered. Finally, alternative methods for assessing CAD severity are currently under evaluation to ascertain their real value for guiding revascularization in patients with severe AS with CAD.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Aortic Regurgitation III: Medical Management
Mitral Stenosis III: Medical Management
Coronary Artery Disease V: Interprofessional Care
Aneurysm III: Interprofessional Care
Aortic Regurgitation II: Clinical Features and Diagnostic Tests
Aortic Regurgitation I: Introduction

