Infective endocarditis occurs worldwide, and is defined by infection of a native or prosthetic heart valve, the endocardial surface, or an indwelling cardiac device. The causes and epidemiology of the disease have evolved in recent decades with a doubling of the average patient age and an increased prevalence in patients with indwelling cardiac devices. The microbiology of the disease has also changed, and staphylococci, most often associated with health-care contact and invasive procedures, have overtaken streptococci as the most common cause of the disease. Although novel diagnostic and therapeutic strategies have emerged, 1 year mortality has not improved and remains at 30%, which is worse than for many cancers. Logistical barriers and an absence of randomised trials hinder clinical management, and longstanding controversies such as use of antibiotic prophylaxis remain unresolved. In this Seminar, we discuss clinical practice, controversies, and strategies needed to target this potentially devastating disease.

Aims : Owing to new evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in low-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis, we compared the collective safety and efficacy of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) vs. surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) across the entire spectrum of surgical risk patients. Methods and results : The meta-analysis is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42016037273). We identified RCTs comparing TAVI with SAVR in patients with severe aortic stenosis reporting at different follow-up periods. We extracted trial, patient, intervention, and outcome characteristics following predefined criteria. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality up to 2 years for the main analysis. Seven trials that randomly assigned 8020 participants to TAVI (4014 patients) and SAVR (4006 patients) were included. The combined mean STS score in the TAVI arm was 9.4%, 5.1%, and 2.0% for high-, intermediate-, and low surgical risk trials, respectively. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation was associated with a significant reduction of all-cause mortality compared to SAVR {hazard ratio [HR] 0.88 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78–0.99], P = 0.030}; an effect that was consistent across the entire spectrum of surgical risk (P-for-interaction = 0.410) and irrespective of type of transcatheter heart valve (THV) system (P-for-interaction = 0.674). Transcatheter aortic valve implantation resulted in lower risk of strokes [HR 0.81 (95% CI 0.68–0.98), P = 0.028]. Surgical aortic valve replacement was associated with a lower risk of major vascular complications [HR 1.99 (95% CI 1.34–2.93), P = 0.001] and permanent pacemaker implantations [HR 2.27 (95% CI 1.47–3.64), P < 0.001] compared to TAVI. Conclusion : Compared with SAVR, TAVI is associated with reduction in all-cause mortality and stroke up to 2 years irrespective of baseline surgical risk and type of THV system.

In the 16 years since the first pioneering procedure, transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has come of age and become a routine strategy for aortic valve replacement, increasingly performed under conscious sedation via transfemoral access. Simplification of the procedure, accumulation of clinical experience, and improvements in valve design and delivery systems have led to a dramatic reduction in complication rates. These advances have allowed transition to lower risk populations, and outcome data from the PARTNER 2A and SURTAVI trials have established a clear evidence base for use in intermediate risk patients. Ongoing studies with an expanding portfolio of devices seem destined to expand indications for TAVI towards lower risk, younger and asymptomatic populations. In this article, we outline recent advances, new devices and current guidelines informing the use of TAVI, and describe remaining uncertainties that need to be addressed.