SAVR will still have its place for patients with obscure anatomy...

SAVR will still have its place for patients with obscure anatomy challenges, combined with other heart surgeries and the like. SAVR is also the most popular and trusted method used for healthy patients. It's a surgery we (humans) have gotten really good at.
Having said that, the technology AVR have developed is disruptive. The product performance and durability along with the far less invasive TAVR will change the industry. The only thing left for us to prove is safety. This is why holders are excited and anxious waiting for the FIH follow up. IMO, once that happens we will generate a real excitement at the next level of investors and then once we have submitted for FDA EFS and hopefully Breakthrough status, the SP will reach our goals for tabling buyout bids rather quickly.
What the industry will genuinely need to take into consideration is that this technology will dominate the current and projected market and move many more patients out of the SAVR space into the TAVR market. The potential is mind boggling or "written into history" as you said.
IMO we still have value from our SAVR trials as it helps to show proof of concept for the valve durability and performance. SAVR will also still need to be an option for some patients.
Also, even though it's a long way off in its complete infancy, the CABG technology we're developing has a completely untapped and unknown value potential which could very well match and/or exceed the value of the valve.
Currently patients in need of CABG have their own veins harvested for that. it is common to do SAVR and CABG together or CABG with other heart interventions.
In everyone's life experience, how many times have you heard parents, grandparents, extended family and friends say the words "bypass surgery", usually prefixed with "double" or "triple" etc.
Nearly 200,000 individual CABG surgeries are performed in the US each year and that balloons to 500,000 when CABG is performed simultaneously with another open heart surgery. This is just US numbers. There is no option (that I am aware of) for an alternative to harvesting major veins. More cuts means more chance of complications, longer surgery and high risk patients or patients with poor/calcified veins may not have any viable for use.
Don't sleep on the CABG technology, if we decided to go to market with TAVR, we'd fund ourselves into more spaces and more use for ADAPT and be a much bigger company than we're currently imagining. Or at very least have another card to wave in front of bidders to show our potential value.

The potential future of the industry dominance for AVR could be:
SAVR
CABG
TAVR
+ future uses for ADAPT to develop more technologies.

All IMO, DYOR