Anticoagulation after transcatheter and surgical bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement: A narrative review.

Authors

Sammy Arab, Karanjot Chhatwal, Rasi Mizori, Arnav Rustogi, Muhtasim Fuad, Balamrit Singh Sokhal, Issam Motairek, Nader Al-Shakarchi, Raheel Ahmed, Monjur Showkat, Prakash Punjabi

Published in

Perfusion. Pages 2676591261496740. Oct 12, 2026. Epub Oct 12, 2026.

Abstract

BackgroundBioprosthetic aortic valve replacement, specifically surgical (SAVR) and transcatheter (TAVR), is among the most frequently performed cardiac interventions globally, yet anticoagulation strategies after implantation remain incompletely defined. Atrial fibrillation, notably prevalent pre- and post-operatively in these patients, substantially amplifies thromboembolic risk and complicates decision-making in an already elderly, frail, and comorbid population.ObjectivesTo critically evaluate current anticoagulation strategies after bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement across sinus rhythm and atrial fibrillation in both SAVR and TAVR, and to identify evidence gaps and guideline inconsistencies.MethodsWe conducted a narrative review of major international guidelines (ESC/EACTS 2025, ACC/AHA 2020, and NICE 2021) and key clinical trials on antithrombotic therapy in valve replacement populations. Focus was placed on bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement, with mechanical and non-aortic valves excluded.ResultsAspirin monotherapy is the most consistently supported strategy after bioprosthetic TAVR in sinus rhythm, though guidelines diverge on duration and recommendation strength. In atrial fibrillation, all three guidelines apply uniform CHA₂DS₂-VASc-based frameworks irrespective of AF phenotype, procedural context, or detection modality, reflecting lacking evidence rather than deliberate clinical judgement. No trial has enrolled patients specifically with new-onset post-procedural AF or stratified by AF subtype, and subclinical AF after bioprosthetic AVR remains entirely uncharacterised.ConclusionsGuideline divergence reflects a structurally inadequate evidence base rather than genuine clinical equipoise. Individualised decisions informed by procedure type, AF phenotype, frailty, and bleeding risk are required to guide clinical practice, alongside an adequately powered stratified randomised trial incorporating mandatory continuous rhythm monitoring.

PMID:
42862070
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 12 Oct 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Stats

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.