CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Coronary fractional flow reserve in bifurcation stenoses: what have we learned? Coronary Artery Intraplaque Microvessels by Optical Coherence Tomography Correlate With Vulnerable Plaque and Predict Clinical Outcomes in Patients With Ischemic Angina Joint consensus on the use of OCT in coronary bifurcation lesions by the European and Japanese bifurcation clubs Management of pulmonary hypertension from left heart disease in candidates for orthotopic heart transplantation Local Low Shear Stress and Endothelial Dysfunction in Patients With Nonobstructive Coronary Atherosclerosis Classification and treatment of coronary artery bifurcation lesions: putting the Medina classification to the test Left ventricular remodelling and changes in functional measurements in patients undergoing transcatheter vs surgical aortic valve replacement: a head-to-head comparison Diagnostic accuracy of intracoronary optical coherence tomography-derived fractional flow reserve for assessment of coronary stenosis severity T and small protrusion (TAP) vs double kissing crush technique: Insights from in-vitro models ‘Small bifurcation?’ CT myocardial mass volume measurements change therapeutic strategy in coronary artery disease

GuidelineJuly 21, 2021

JOURNAL:JAMA Cardiol. Article Link

Guideline Update on Indications for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Based on the 2020 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Guidelines for Management of Valvular Heart Disease

TM Sundt; H Jneid et al. Keywords: TAVR; valular heart disease; indication; guideline

ABSTRACT

The continued evolution of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) technology and the results of multiple randomized clinical trials (RCTs) have firmly established this approach as an alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in the treatment of aortic stenosis in all risk groups. Deciding on TAVI or SAVR depends on patient-specific factors, including technical, procedure-specific contraindications and the balance between estimated life expectancy and anticipated prosthesis durability. These factors pertain to the decision between mechanical and biological prostheses, and if the choice is biological, between SAVR and TAVI. A strong emphasis is now placed on shared decision-making with the patient and involvement of the multidisciplinary heart team. For most patients younger than 65 years, SAVR is recommended, with mechanical valves favored in those younger than 50 years. For those older than 65 years, the perioperative risks of mortality and stroke are lower with transfemoral TAVI compared with SAVR, but the risks of paravalvular leak, a pacemaker requirement, and vascular complications are higher.