Numerous randomized-controlled (also controlledby the industry giants) trials have shown that, interms of short-term outcomes, transcatheter aorticvalve implantation (TAVI) offers a suitable alternativeto the current gold standard of surgical aortic valvereplacement (SAVR), even in low-risk patients.However, the main limitation of these trials is that thefollow-up period is limited to 12 months alone.[1,2] Ina review of nearly 14,000 patients, five-year survivalafter TAVI was found to be 48%.[3] Compared tothe expected survival for a general population ofsimilar age, this study demonstrated poorer survivaloutcomes after TAVI. In their recent meta-analysiscomparing SAVR and TAVI in low- and intermediateriskpatients, Ueshima et al.[4] demonstrated similarall-cause mortality, cardiac mortality, and neurologicalevents during a two-year follow-up. Although the shorttermresults have been well-studied in the literature,there is a limited number of data regarding long-termoutcomes following TAVI, and with the unknowntranscatheter valve durability, TAVI should not beoffered to low-risk young patients, until long-termfollow-up data are available.