In the evolving scenario of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), the topic of bioprosthetic valve durability is becoming increasingly important. Unfortunately, the definition of long-term durability of surgical and transcatheter bioprostheses has been inconsistent over time. Comparative studies of TAVR and surgical aortic valve replacement, or studies comparing TAVR devices, would benefit from the use of standardized definitions of valve durability. The definitions of structural valve deterioration and bioprosthetic valve failure developed by the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) have been endorsed by both the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS) and embraced by many investigators worldwide. In this viewpoint, the authors discuss the strengths and limitations of such approach, which is intended to balance the need for accuracy and simplicity in reporting of long-term durability.

中文翻译：

---

如何定义经导管和外科生物人工主动脉瓣的耐用性：事实和误解。

在经导管主动脉瓣置换术（TAVR）不断发展的情况下，生物人工瓣膜耐久性的话题变得越来越重要。不幸的是，随着时间的推移，外科手术和经导管生物假体的长期耐用性的定义一直不一致。TAVR和外科主动脉瓣置换术的比较研究或TAVR设备的比较研究将受益于瓣膜耐用性的标准化定义。欧洲经皮心血管介入协会（EAPCI）提出的结构性瓣膜恶化和生物瓣膜衰竭的定义已得到欧洲心脏病学会（ESC）和欧洲心胸外科学会（EACTS）的认可，并得到了认可世界各地的许多调查员。从这个角度来看，