ShareThis Page

Aortic valve procedure alternative for elderly

Ben Schmitt
| Monday, Jan. 25, 2016, 9:00 p.m.

After a second fainting episode in a month, William Tatrai and his doctor knew medicine alone wouldn't treat his heart condition.

“I was in the bathroom and, the next thing I knew, I was on the floor,” Tatrai, of Munhall, recalled. “A month later, in late November, I was in my bedroom putting on a pair of socks and I fainted again, falling right off my chair. My doctor put me right in the hospital.”

At 92, the physical trauma of open heart surgery wasn't a realistic option for Tatrai.

For several years, he suffered from a condition known as aortic stenosis, which affects a half-million Americans, many of them elderly.

The narrowing of the heart's aortic valve can lead to dizziness, fatigue, breathlessness and chest pain, among other symptoms.

Previously, a patient's only option other than medicine and a doctor's observation was to have open heart surgery to replace the aortic valve. However, in many cases, surgery is too risky for elderly patients.

“My doctor told me about this fairly new procedure that he thought might help,” said Tatrai, a retired U.S. Steel worker. “I knew I didn't want to risk open heart surgery.”

The procedure, known as transcatheter aortic valve replacement, or TAVR, is gaining momentum as an established alternative to surgery for elderly patients or high-risk surgery patients. In the procedure, doctors implant an artificial valve through a catheter, or thin tube, inserted through a large artery in the leg or chest.

In Tatrai's case, Dr. Thomas Gleason, chief of UPMC's cardiac surgery division, performed the TAVR at UPMC Shadyside in December.

“I feel great,” Tatrai said Monday. “I recovered in a nursing home, and now I'm back home feeling fine.”

Health systems UPMC and Allegheny Health Network perform TAVR procedures. UPMC cardiologists recently performed their 500th TAVR operation.

“People are enthusiastic because it is less invasive,” Gleason told the Tribune-Review. “The stress on the system is not as high, and we can avoid putting patients on the heart-lung machine.”

He said long-term results of TAVR compared to surgery need to be monitored.

“We'll know more at the 10-year mark,” Gleason said. “But I can say with confidence in the early and mid-term, it appears equivalent to surgery.”

Studies and randomized trials are underway to determine if the procedure would benefit aortic stenosis patients at lower risk for surgical complications.

“The tide is turning toward studying this technology in intermediate risk patients,” Gleason said. “Eventually those classified as low-risk may also be studied.”

Tatrai, who lives with his son, Joel, 63, is pleased that his doctors recognized he could benefit from TAVR.

“For a few years, they were waiting to see if something serious happened, and something happened,” he said of the fainting. “So far, so good.”

Ben Schmitt is a Tribune-Review staff writer. Reach him at 412-320-7991 or

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.