Search

Rationale: The impact of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) or surgical aortic valve replacement (AVR) on cognitive status and quality of life in high-risk patients has been incompletely investigated., Methods: We conducted a prospective, multicenter study including all patients treated with TAVI and high-risk patients undergoing AVR (age ≥80 years or logistic EuroSCORE ≥15%) at participating centers. Multidimensional geriatric evaluation including Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE), EuroQol 5D (EQ5D) and Minnesota Living With Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ) were performed at baseline and at 3- and 12-month follow-up., Results: A total of 518 patients (151 AVR and 367 TAVI) were enrolled in 10 Italian institutions. Patients receiving AVR were older (82.7 ± 2.4 years), with a lower logistic EuroSCORE (12.5 ± 7.1%) as compared with TAVI patients (81.5 ± 6.2 years and 19.6 ± 14.0%, respectively, p=0.001 and p<0.001). Overall, 35.5% of patients showed some degree of cognitive impairment at baseline, with no differences between groups. No significant changes in the cognitive status were observed between baseline and follow-up and between groups at any time point. TAVI patients had a lower quality of life at baseline as compared with AVR patients. Generic and heart failure-related quality of life improved significantly after either procedure., Conclusions: In high-risk patients, both TAVI and AVR are associated with a significant improvement of quality of life up to 1 year without a detrimental effect on cognitive function.

Background: There are scarce data on outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients with renal failure., Methods: We evaluated the impact of renal failure on outcomes after TAVI and SAVR and compared the results of these procedures in patients with chronic kidney disease stages 3b to 5 from the Observational Study of Effectiveness of AVR-TAVI Procedures for Severe Aortic Stenosis Treatment (OBSERVANT) study., Results: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) stages 3b to 5 was associated with an increased risk of mortality after either TAVI or SAVR compared with CKD stages 1 to 3a. Among 170 propensity score-matched pairs with CKD stages 3b to 5, patients who underwent TAVI had a significantly higher rate of permanent pacemaker implantation, vascular damage, and mild to moderate paravalvular regurgitation, and tended to have a higher 30-day mortality (7.1% versus 2.9%; p = 0.09). Thirty-day mortality after transapical TAVI was 7.1%. SAVR had a significantly higher rate of blood transfusions, stroke, and acute kidney injury. At 2 years, patients undergoing TAVI had somewhat higher all-cause mortality (31.2% versus 23.4%; p = 0.118), major cardiac and cerebrovascular events (37.2% versus 31.0%; p = 0.270), and a lower risk of dialysis (12.4% versus 21.2%; p = 0.052) compared with SAVR., Conclusions: CKD stages 3b to 5 increases the risk of mortality after TAVI and SAVR. In this subset of patients, SAVR was associated with somewhat better early and late survival. The risk of acute kidney injury was higher after SAVR. These findings suggest that CKD stages 3b to 5 does not contraindicate SAVR. Strategies to prevent severe acute kidney injury should be implemented with either SAVR or TAVI., (Copyright © 2016 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The aim of this study was to analyze procedural and postprocedural outcomes of patients aged ≥80 years treated by transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) as enrolled in the OBservational Study of Effectiveness of SAVR-TAVR procedures for severe Aortic steNosis Treatment (OBSERVANT) Study. TAVI is offered to patients with aortic stenosis judged inoperable or at high surgical risk. Nevertheless, it is common clinical practice to treat elderly (≥80 years) patients by TAVI regardless of surgical risk for traditional SAVR. OBSERVANT is a multicenter, observational, prospective cohort study that enrolled patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis who underwent SAVR or TAVI from December 2010 to June 2012 in 93 Italian participating hospitals. Information on demographic characteristics, health status before intervention, therapeutic approach, and intraprocedural and 30-day outcomes was collected. An administrative follow-up was set up to collect data on midterm to long-term outcomes. We reviewed baseline and procedural data of patients aged ≥80 years, looking for different early and late outcome after TAVI or SAVR. Patients treated by TAVI were sicker than SAVR because of higher rate of co-morbidities, advanced illness, frailty, and Logistic EuroSCORE. After propensity matching, early and midterm mortality were comparable between the 2 groups. However, patients treated by TAVI had higher rate of vascular complications (6.0% vs 0.5%; p <0.0001), permanent pacemaker implantation (13.4% vs 3.7%; p <0.0001), and paravalvular leak (8.9% vs 2.4%; p <0.0001). Patients who underwent SAVR had more frequent bleedings needing transfusion (63.2% vs 34.5%; p <0.0001) and acute kidney injury (9.6% vs 3.9%; p = 0.0010). In conclusion, patients aged ≥80 years treated by TAVI or SAVR had similar early and midterm mortality., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The proven efficacy of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in high-risk patients is leading to the expansion of its indications toward lower-risk patients. However, this shift is not supported by meaningful evidence of its benefit over surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). This analysis aims to describe outcomes of TAVI versus SAVR in low-risk patients., Methods and Results: We compared the outcome after TAVI and SAVR of low-risk patients (European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation II [EuroSCORE II] <4%) included in the Observational Study of Effectiveness of SAVR-TAVI Procedures for Severe Aortic Stenosis Treatment (OBSERVANT) study. The primary outcome was 3-year survival. Secondary outcomes were early events and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events at 3 years. Propensity score matching resulted in 355 pairs of patients with similar baseline characteristics. Thirty-day survival was 97.1% after SAVR and 97.4% after TAVI (P=0.82). Cardiac tamponade, permanent pacemaker implantation, major vascular damage, and moderate-to-severe paravalvular regurgitation were significantly more frequent after TAVI compared with SAVR. Stroke rates were equal in the study groups. SAVR was associated with higher risk of cardiogenic shock, severe bleeding, and acute kidney injury. At 3 years, survival was 83.4% after SAVR and 72.0% after TAVI (P=0.0015), whereas freedom from major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events was 80.9% after SAVR and 67.3% after TAVI (P<0.001)., Conclusions: In patients with low operative risk, significantly better 3-year survival and freedom from major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events were observed after SAVR compared with TAVI. Further studies on new-generation valve prostheses are necessary before expanding indications of TAVI toward lower-risk patients., (© 2016 American Heart Association, Inc.)

Background: Contemporary scores for estimating perioperative death have been proposed to also predict also long-term death. The aim of the study was to evaluate the performance of the updated European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation II, The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality score, and the Age, Creatinine, Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction score for predicting long-term mortality in a contemporary cohort of isolated aortic valve replacement (AVR). We also sought to develop for each score a simple algorithm based on predicted perioperative risk to predict long-term survival., Methods: Complete data on 1,444 patients who underwent isolated AVR in a 7-year period were retrieved from three prospective institutional databases and linked with the Italian Tax Register Information System. Data were evaluated with performance analyses and time-to-event semiparametric regression., Results: Survival was 83.0% ± 1.1% at 5 years and 67.8 ± 1.9% at 8 years. Discrimination and calibration of all three scores both worsened for prediction of death at 1 year and 5 years. Nonetheless, a significant relationship was found between long-term survival and quartiles of scores (p < 0.0001). The estimated perioperative risk by each model was used to develop an algorithm to predict long-term death. The hazard ratios for death were 1.1 (95% confidence interval, 1.07 to 1.12) for European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation II, 1.34 (95% CI, 1.28 to 1.40) for the Society of Thoracic Surgeons score, and 1.08 (95% CI, 1.06 to 1.10) for the Age, Creatinine, Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction score., Conclusions: The predicted risk generated by European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation II, The Society of Thoracic Surgeons score, and Age, Creatinine, Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction scores cannot also be considered a direct estimate of the long-term risk for death. Nonetheless, the three scores can be used to derive an estimate of long-term risk of death in patients who undergo isolated AVR with the use of a simple algorithm., (Copyright © 2016 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

A few studies recently reported controversial results with transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TF-TAVR) versus transapical transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TA-TAVR), often without adequate adjusted analysis for baseline differences. Data on patients who underwent TF-TAVR and TA-TAVR from the Observational Study of Effectiveness of avR-tavI procedures for severe Aortic stenosis Treatment study were analyzed with propensity score 1-to-1 matching. From a cohort of 1,654 patients (1,419 patients underwent TF-TAVR and 235 patients underwent TA-TAVR), propensity score matching resulted in 199 pairs of patients with similar operative risk (EuroSCORE II: TF-TAVR 8.1 ± 7.1% vs TA-TAVR, 8.4 ± 7.3%, p = 0.713). Thirty-day mortality was 8.0% after TA-TAVR and 4.0% after TF-TAVR (p = 0.102). Postoperative rates of stroke (TA-TAVR, 2.0% vs TF-TAVR 1.0%, p = 0.414), cardiac tamponade (TA-TAVR, 4.1% vs TF-TAVR 1.5%, p = 0.131), permanent pacemaker implantation (TA-TAVR, 8.7% vs TF-TAVR 13.3%, p = 0.414), and infection (TA-TAVR, 6.7% vs TF-TAVR 3.6%, p = 0.180) were similar in the study groups but with an overall trend in favor of TF-TAVR. Higher rates of major vascular damage (7.2% vs 1.0%, p = 0.003) and moderate-to-severe paravalvular regurgitation (7.8% vs 5.2%, p = 0.008) were observed after TF-TAVR. On the contrary, TA-TAVR was associated with higher rates of red blood cell transfusion (50.0% vs 30.4%, p = 0.0002) and acute kidney injury (stages 1 to 3: 44.4% vs 21.9%, p <0.0001) compared with TF-TAVR. Three-year survival rate was 69.1% after TF-TAVR and 57.0% after TA-TAVR (p = 0.006), whereas freedom from major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events was 61.9% after TF-TAVR and 50.4% after TA-TAVR (p = 0.011). In conclusion, TF-TAVR seems to be associated with significantly higher early and intermediate survival compared with TA-TAVR. The transfemoral approach, whenever feasible, should be considered the route of choice for TAVR., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: There is a paucity of prospective and controlled data on the comparative effectiveness of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) versus surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in a real-world setting., Objectives: This analysis aims to describe 1-year clinical outcomes of a large series of propensity-matched patients who underwent SAVR and transfemoral TAVR., Methods: The OBSERVANT (Observational Study of Effectiveness of SAVR-TAVI Procedures for Severe Aortic Stenosis Treatment) trial is an observational prospective multicenter cohort study that enrolled patients with aortic stenosis (AS) who underwent SAVR or TAVR. The propensity score method was applied to select 2 groups with similar baseline characteristics. All outcomes were adjudicated through a linkage with administrative databases. The primary endpoints of this analysis were death from any cause and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) at 1 year., Results: The unadjusted enrolled population (N = 7,618) included 5,707 SAVR patients and 1,911 TAVR patients. The matched population had a total of 1,300 patients (650 per group). The propensity score method generated a low-intermediate risk population (mean logistic EuroSCORE 1: 10.2 ± 9.2% vs. 9.5 ± 7.1%, SAVR vs. transfemoral TAVR; p = 0.104). At 1 year, the rate of death from any cause was 13.6% in the surgical group and 13.8% in the transcatheter group (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.72 to 1.35; p = 0.936). Similarly, there were no significant differences in the rates of MACCE, which were 17.6% in the surgical group and 18.2% in the transcatheter group (HR: 1.03; 95% CI: 0.78 to 1.36; p = 0.831). The cumulative incidence of cerebrovascular events, and rehospitalization due to cardiac reasons and acute heart failure was similar in both groups at 1 year., Conclusions: The results suggest that SAVR and transfemoral TAVR have comparable mortality, MACCE, and rates of rehospitalization due to cardiac reasons at 1 year. These data need to be confirmed in longer term and dedicated ongoing randomized trials., (Copyright © 2015 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Despite the widespread use of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), the role of sex on outcome after TAVI or surgical aortic valve replacement (AVR) has been poorly investigated. We investigated the impact of sex on outcome after TAVI or AVR., Methods: There were 2108 patients undergoing TAVI or AVR who were enrolled in the Italian Observational Multicenter Registry (OBSERVANT). Thirty-day mortality, major periprocedural morbidity, and transprosthetic gradients were stratified by sex according to interventions., Results: Female AVR patients showed a worse risk profile compared with male AVR patients, given the higher mean age, prevalence of frailty score of 2 or higher, New York Heart Association class of 3 or higher, lower body weight, and preoperative hemoglobin level (P ≤ .02). Similarly, female TAVI patients had a different risk profile than male TAVI patients, given a higher age and a lower body weight and preoperative hemoglobin level (P ≤ .005), but with a similar New York Heart Association class, frailty score, EuroSCORE (P = NS), a better left ventricular ejection fraction and a lower prevalence of left ventricular ejection fraction less than 30%, porcelain aorta, renal dysfunction, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, arteriopathy, and previous cardiovascular surgery or percutaneous coronary intervention (P ≤ .01). Women showed a smaller aortic annulus than men in both populations (P < .001). Female sex was an independent predictor in the AVR population for risk-adjusted 30-day mortality (odds ratio [OR], 2.34; P = .043) and transfusions (OR, 1.47; P = .003), but not for risk-adjusted acute myocardial infarction, stroke, vascular complications, permanent atrioventricular block (P = NS). Female sex was an independent predictor in the TAVI population for risk-adjusted major vascular complications (OR, 2.92; P = .018) and transfusions (OR, 1.93; P = .003), but proved protective against moderate to severe postprocedural aortic insufficiency (P = .018)., Conclusions: Female sex is a risk factor for mortality after aortic valve replacement, for major vascular complications after TAVI, and for transfusions after both approaches., (Copyright © 2014 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: OBSERVANT represents the first national observational study on the comparative effectiveness of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) vs surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) at short, medium and long term, in a patient population with severe aortic stenosis (AS). The aim of this paper is to describe patient characteristics and short-term outcomes of the enrolled population., Methods: OBSERVANT is an observational prospective multicenter cohort study that enrolled AS patients undergoing SAVR or TAVI from December 2010 to June 2012 in the participating hospitals. Information on demographic characteristics, health status prior to intervention, therapeutic approach, intraprocedural and 30-day outcomes was collected. An administrative follow-up was set up to collect data on long-term outcomes., Results: The enrolled population included 7618 patients undergoing transfemoral/transubclavian TAVI (TF/TS-TAVI, n=1652), transapical TAVI (TA-TAVI, n=259) or SAVR (n=5707). SAVR patients were younger and with a lower risk profile than TAVI patients (logistic EuroSCORE: SAVR 6.4 ± 7.3%, TF/TS-TAVI 14.1 ± 12.1%, TA-TAVI 15.5 ± 11.0%; p<0.001). When 30-day mortality rates were stratified by logistic EuroSCORE, a statistically significant difference was found only in the patient subgroup with logistic EuroSCORE ≤5% (SAVR 1.0%, TF/TS-TAVI 4.7%, TA-TAVI 0.0%; p=0.005)., Conclusions: Findings from the OBSERVANT study confirm that patients undergoing TAVI are older and sicker than patients undergoing SAVR. Nevertheless, the logistic EuroSCORE shows that, in Italy, also patients at intermediate surgical risk are treated with TAVI. Stratifying by logistic EuroSCORE, SAVR seems to be superior to TAVI in the subgroup of patients at very low risk. More sophisticated analyses on patient subgroups with comparable risk profile and on long-term follow-up will allow to obtain valuable information on the effectiveness of TAVI and SAVR procedures.

Objective: Despite demonstration of the superior outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) versus optimal medical therapy for severe left ventricular systolic dysfunction, studies comparing TAVI and surgical aortic valve replacement (AVR) in this high-risk group have been lacking., Methods: We performed propensity matching for age, gender, baseline comorbidities, previous interventions, priority at hospital admission, frailty score, New York Heart Association class, EuroSCORE, and associated cardiac diseases. Next, the 30-day mortality and procedure-related morbidity of 162 patients (81 TAVI vs 81 AVR) with severe left ventricular systolic dysfunction (ejection fraction ≤ 35%) were analyzed at the Italian National Institute of Health., Results: The 30-day mortality was comparable (P = .37) between the 2 groups. The incidence of periprocedural acute myocardial infarction (P = .55), low output state (P = .27), stroke (P = .36), and renal dysfunction (peak creatinine level, P = .57) was also similar between the 2 groups. TAVI resulted in significantly greater postprocedural permanent pacemaker implantation (P = .01) and AVR in more periprocedural transfusions (P < .01) despite a similar transfusion rate per patient (2.8 ± 3.7 for TAVI vs 4.4 ± 3.8 for AVR; P = .08). The postprocedural intensive care unit stay (median, 2 days after TAVI vs 3 days after AVR; P = .34), intermediate care unit stay (median, 0 days after both TAVI and AVR; P = .94), and hospitalization (median, 11 days after TAVI vs 14 days after AVR; P = .51) were comparable., Conclusions: In patients with severe left ventricular systolic dysfunction, both TAVI and AVR are valid treatment options, with comparable hospital mortality and periprocedural morbidity. Comparisons of the mid- to long-term outcomes are mandatory., (Copyright © 2014 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Despite the well-known impact of female sex on outcome after surgical aortic valve replacement (sAVR), few studies investigated its role after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR)., Methods: After propensity-matching for age, baseline comorbidities, previous interventions, priority, frailty score, New York Heart Association class, left ventricular function and associated cardiac diseases, hospital mortality, and procedure-related morbidities of 388 women (194 TAVR versus 194 sAVR)-of 5,231 patients enrolled in 70 centers participating in this prospective multicenter national registry-were analyzed at a central management unit of the Italian National Institute of Health., Results: Although hospital mortality was comparable (4.1% TAVR versus 3.1% sAVR; p = 0.177), women undergoing sAVR showed a higher rate of transfusion (63.9% versus 37.1% TAVR; p = 0.0001); higher number of transfusions per patient (3.6 ± 0.4 versus 2.3 ± 0.3 TAVR; p = 0.049); a higher incidence of low cardiac output state (5.7% versus 3.6% TAVR; p = 0.017) and acute renal failure (8.8% versus 4.1% TAVR; p = 0.01); and higher mean transprosthetic gradients (15.7 ± 12.6 mm Hg versus 11.9 ± 10.7 mm Hg TAVR; p = 0.004). In contrast, women undergoing TAVR experienced significant postprocedural aortic regurgitation (mild, 37.6% versus 7.7% sAVR; moderate-to-severe, 7.1% versus 1.5% sAVR; p = 0.0001) and a higher rate of stroke (7.7% versus 2.5% sAVR; p = 0.037), major vascular complications (9.3% versus 0.5% sAVR; p = 0.0001), pacemaker implantation (12.4% versus 6.2% sAVR; p = 0.004), need for emergent percutaneous coronary intervention (1.0% versus 0% sAVR; p = 0.007), and longer intermediate care unit length of stay (2.5 ± 4.4 days versus 1.4 ± 2.6 days sAVR; p = 0.008). Perioperative myocardial infarction and lengths of intensive care unit stay and hospitalization were comparable (not significant)., Conclusions: Women undergoing sAVR and TAVR experienced different periprocedural morbidities. These data strongly suggest the need to strictly individualize the indications., (Copyright © 2013 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is an emerging alternative technique that has shown promise in the treatment of severe aortic stenosis in patient populations at high risk with conventional surgery. The presence of a bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) has been considered an exclusion criterion for TAVI, because of the presumed risk for poor seating or paravalvular regurgitation due to severe distortion of the native valve leaflets. For this reason, BAV disease has generally been an exclusion criterion in major trials of TAVI and there is little clinical experience available. We report a case of transcatheter valve replacement in a poor surgical candidate with BAV stenosis using a new 29 mm Edwards Sapien prosthesis.

Objective: The aim of this study was to assess clinical and hemodynamic outcomes of transapical aortic valve implantation (TA-TAVI) in patients enrolled in the Italian Registry of Trans-Apical Aortic Valve Implantation (I-TA)., Methods: From April 2008 until November 2010, 504 patients from 20 Italian centers were enrolled in the I-TA registry. Mean logistic EuroSCORE and Society of Thoracic Surgeons score were 24% ± 16% and 11% ± 4%, respectively. Mean follow-up was 9.2 ± 6.5 months (range, 1-26 months). Outcomes were analyzed according to intraoperative complications, procedural volume (high-volume centers, >20 cases; low-volume centers, < 20 cases) and learning curve (first 50% cases vs second 50% cases of each center)., Results: All-cause overall mortality was 8.3% (42 patients). Device success was 99% (500/504 patients). Intraoperative severe complications occurred in 24 (4.8%) patients. Overall 2-year survival was 71.5% ± 6.2%. At discharge, peak and mean gradients were 16.4 ± 11.2 and 8.7 ± 4.1 mm Hg, respectively, and effective orifice area was 1.67 cm(2). These values remained stable at 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. Independent risk factors for mortality after TA-TAVI were as follows: New York Heart Association class III and IV (odds ratio [OR], 4.43; 95% confidence intervals [CI], 1.28-15.40; P = .02); logistic EuroSCORE greater than 20 (OR, 1.83; 95% CI, 1.02-3.29; P = .04); creatinine concentration greater than 200 μmol/L (OR, 2.56; 95% CI, 1.07-6.15; P = .03), and intraoperative complications (OR, 5.80; 95% CI, 2.68-12.55; P < .001). There were no significant differences in outcomes between high- and low-volume centers and between the first and the second 50% of cases., Conclusions: TA-TAVI represents a safe and effective alternative treatment for patients who are inoperable or at high risk for surgery. The occurrence of an intraoperative complication significantly affects survival. Procedural volume and learning curve have no impact on patient survival., (Copyright © 2011 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Rationale: Severe symptomatic aortic stenosis (SSAS) is the most common acquired valvular heart disease in the western world, and its prevalence is strongly linked to the phenomenon of population ageing. After symptom onset, patients with SSAS, if untreated, show very poor prognoses, unavoidably reaching complete disability status with a significant reduction in survival. Although aortic valve replacement (AVR) is the definitive therapy for this kind of patients, a new, less-invasive alternative like transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has been considered, at least for a large proportion of patients with very high or prohibitive operative risks. OBSERVANT represents the first observational multicenter perspective study on the comparative effectiveness of TAVI, AVR, and medical therapy in the Italian population with SSAS., Materials and Methods: In the participating hospitals, to define the patient risk profile for each patient with SSAS, data on demographic characteristics, health status prior to intervention and presence of comorbidities will be collected. Moreover, complete information on the type of intervention will be gathered. Mortality within 30 days from intervention is the primary adverse outcome. Secondary outcomes include mortality within 12 and 24 months and the incidence of in-hospital major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events. Clinical monitoring procedures will allow assessment of the reliability and completeness of the database and help maintain constant quality control. To compare the effectiveness of AVR, TAVI, and medical treatment in terms of medium- and long-term outcomes, accounting for possible differences in patient case-mix among the three treatment groups, risk adjustment techniques will be applied., Expected Results: Short-, medium-, and long-term outcome in patients undergoing one of the three SSAS treatments; use, appropriateness, and economic and organizational impact of TAVI and AVR procedures; specific "indication criteria" to guarantee appropriate patient selection for AVR or TAVI; new pre-procedure risk score, specific for the elderly Italian population; guidelines on TAVI procedure coding and a system of administrative follow-up to be proposed to the regional health systems for managing the use of the AVR or TAVI procedures., Conclusions: The complete knowledge base derived from this study will be directly transferable to professionals and policy makers, giving them evidence-based results for use in their decision-making process.