CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

经导管主动脉瓣置换

科研文章

荐读文献

Edoxaban versus Vitamin K Antagonist for Atrial Fibrillation after TAVR Acute Aortic Syndrome Revisited: JACC State-of-the-Art Review Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Represents an Anti-Inflammatory Therapy Via Reduction of Shear Stress–Induced, Piezo-1–Mediated Monocyte Activation Evolving concepts in the management of antithrombotic therapy in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation 2-Year Outcomes After Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Low-Risk Patients Minimum Core Data Elements for Evaluation of TAVR: A Scientific Statement by PASSION CV, HVC, and TVT Registry Edoxaban versus Dual Antiplatelet Therapy for Leaflet Thrombosis and Cerebral Thromboembolism after TAVR: The ADAPT-TAVR Randomized Clinical Trial Left ventricular remodelling and changes in functional measurements in patients undergoing transcatheter vs surgical aortic valve replacement: a head-to-head comparison
|<<... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 >>|

Review ArticleSeptember 9, 2020

JOURNAL：JAMA Cardiol. Article Link

Considerations for Optimal Device Selection in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Review

BE Claessen, GHL Tang, AS Kini et al. Keywords: TAVR; device selection; RCT

ABSTRACT

IMPORTANCE - Aortic valve stenosis (AS) is the most common manifestation of acquired valvular heart disease in developed countries. Several large-scale randomized clinical trials investigating the entire spectrum of patients with severe symptomatic AS from low to prohibitive risk have established transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) as a safe and effective alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement.


OBSERVATIONS - There are currently only 3 types of TAVR devices commercially available in the US, but several other valve types are undergoing clinical trials in the US. Because of fundamental differences in engineering features, each TAVR device type has specific strengths and limitations. This review aims to provide an overview of design features and clinical outcomes of various TAVR devices that are either commercially available or undergoing clinical investigation.


CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE - Given the lack of large-scale head-to-head comparisons of various TAVR devices and the rapid development of new device iterations, there is insufficient evidence to claim superiority of one device type over another. Nonetheless, as each TAVR device has unique design characteristics, certain patient-related and anatomy-related factors may slightly favor one or several particular designs.

>CBS CBS 2019

> CBS 2019

> CBS 2019 注册

> CBS 2019 会议日程

> CBS 2019 学术征集

> CBS 2019 热点

 CBSMD

> CBSMD 网站注册

> 教育中心

> 荐读文献

> Top 10 阅读文献

> 文献导读
CBS 2019 CBS 2019 主席团 教育中心 科研动态
Copyright ⓒ CBS MD Nanjing China. All rights reserved. 京ICP备16025898号-11
联系我们| Top