Baron SJ, et al. - Researchers compared transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) with respect to cost-effectiveness in intermediate-risk aortic stenosis (AS) patients. In the PARTNER 2 trial, 3,110 intermediate-risk AS patients treated with TAVR or SAVR between 2011 and 2014 were examined. The investigators estimated procedural costs as well as other in-trial costs. In terms of cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained, lifetime cost-effectiveness was estimated from the perspective of the US healthcare system using a Markov model that was informed by in-trial costs, utilities, and survival data. TAVR vs SAVR offered greater quality-adjusted life expectancy and lower long-term costs in intermediate-risk AS patients and was projected to be economically dominant from the perspective of the US healthcare system. TAVR might be the preferred treatment strategy for this patient population if long-term data demonstrate comparable late mortality with TAVR and SAVR.