Bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) is the most common congenital heart disease, with a prevalence of 1–2% and occurring in >20% of octogenarians referred for aortic valve replacement. However, BAV patients have been systematically excluded from pivotal randomized trials. Since TAVI indications are moving toward low-risk patients, an increase in the number of BAV patients who undergo TAVI is expected. BAV represents a challenge due to its unique morphological features (raphe, extreme asymmetrical valve calcifications, cusp asymmetry and aortopathy) and the lack of consensus about the accurate sizing method. The role of multi-slice computed tomography (MSCT) in the planification of the TAVI procedure is well-established, being useful to define the optimal valve sizing and the implantation strategy. New-generation devices, more experience of the operators and better planification of the procedure have been associated with similar clinical outcomes in bicuspid and tricuspid patients undergoing TAVI.

Over the past few years, transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) imposed itself as the first-choice therapy for symptomatic aortic stenosis (AS) in elderly patients at surgical risk. There have been continuous technological advancements in the latest iterations of TAVI devices and implantation techniques, which have bolstered their adoption. Moreover, the favorable outcomes coming out from clinical trials represent an indisputable point of strength for TAVI. As indications for transcatheter therapies now include a low surgical risk and younger individuals, new challenges are emerging. In this context, the matter of prosthesis durability is noteworthy. Initial evidence is beginning to emerge from the studies in the field, but they are still limited and compromised by multiple biases. Additionally, the physiopathological mechanisms behind the valve’s deterioration are nowadays somewhat clearer and classified. So, who outlasts who—the valve or the patient? This review aims to explore the available evidence surrounding this intriguing question, examining the various factors affecting prosthesis durability and discussing its potential implications for clinical management and current interventional practice.