CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Randomized study on simple versus complex stenting of coronary artery bifurcation lesions: the Nordic bifurcation study Optical Coherence Tomography Predictors for Recurrent Restenosis After Paclitaxel-Coated Balloon Angioplasty for Drug-Eluting Stent Restenosis The European bifurcation club Left Main Coronary Stent study: a randomized comparison of stepwise provisional vs. systematic dual stenting strategies (EBC MAIN) In-Hospital Outcomes of Chronic Total Occlusion Percutaneous Coronary Interventions in Patients With Prior Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery Comparison of the safety and efficacy of two types of drug-eluting balloons (RESTORE DEB and SeQuent® Please) in the treatment of coronary in-stent restenosis: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial (RESTORE ISR China) Multicentre, randomized comparison of two-stent and provisional stenting techniques in patients with complex coronary bifurcation lesions: the DEFINITION II trial Comparison of new-generation drug-eluting stents versus drug-coated balloon for in-stent restenosis: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials Sustainable Antirestenosis Effect With a Low-Dose Drug-Coated Balloon: The ILLUMENATE European Randomized Clinical Trial 2-Year Results Angiographic quantitative flow ratio-guided coronary intervention (FAVOR III China): a multicentre, randomised, sham-controlled trial Long-term clinical outcomes after treatment of stent restenosis with two drug-coated balloons
|<<... 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 ...>>|

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.
>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