CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

经导管主动脉瓣置换

Abstract

Recommended Article

Incidence, predictors, and outcomes associated with acute kidney injury in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement: from the BRAVO-3 randomized trial Suture- or Plug-Based Large-Bore Arteriotomy Closure: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial Feasibility of Coronary Access and Aortic Valve Reintervention in Low-Risk TAVR Patients Considerations for Optimal Device Selection in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Review Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance as a complementary method to Transthoracic Echocardiography for Aortic Valve Area Estimation in patients with Aortic Stenosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Low-Risk Patients With Symptomatic Severe Bicuspid Aortic Valve Stenosis Health Status After Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Low-Risk Patients With Aortic Stenosis Reduced Leaflet Motion after Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Replacement

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.