Clinical evidence in coronary surgery is usually derived from retrospective, single institutional series. This may introduce significant biases in the analysis of critical issues in the treatment of these patients. In order to avoid such methodological limitations, we planned a European multicenter, prospective study on coronary artery bypass grafting, the E-CABG registry. The E-CABG registry is a multicenter study and its data are prospectively collected from 13 centers of cardiac surgery in university and community hospitals located in six European countries (England, Italy, Finland, France, Germany, Sweden). Data on major and minor immediate postoperative adverse events will be collected. Data on late all-cause mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction and repeat revascularization will be collected during a 10-year follow-up period. These investigators provided a score from 0 to 10 for any major postoperative adverse events and their rounded medians were used to stratify the severity of these complications in four grades. The sum of these scores for each complication/intervention occurring after coronary artery bypass grafting will be used as an additive score for further stratification of the prognostic importance of these events. The E-CABG registry is expected to provide valuable data for identification of risk factors and treatment strategies associated with suboptimal outcome. These information may improve the safety and durability of coronary artery bypass grafting. The proposed classification of postoperative complications may become a valuable research tool to stratify the impact of such complications on the outcome of these patients and evaluate the burden of resources needed for their treatment. NCT02319083

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.