CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

A Randomized Study of Distal Filter Protection Versus Conventional Treatment During Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With Attenuated Plaque Identified by Intravascular Ultrasound Frailty Is Intertwined With Heart Failure: Mechanisms, Prevalence, Prognosis, Assessment, and Management Relationship between intravascular ultrasound guidance and clinical outcomes after drug-eluting stents: the assessment of dual antiplatelet therapy with drug-eluting stents (ADAPT-DES) study Assessment of coronary atherosclerosis by IVUS and IVUS-based imaging modalities: progression and regression studies, tissue composition and beyond Comparison of intravascular ultrasound guided versus angiography guided drug eluting stent implantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis Surgery Does Not Improve Survival in Patients With Isolated Severe Tricuspid Regurgitation Phenomapping for Novel Classification of Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction Temporal Trends in Inpatient Use of Intravascular Imaging Among Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in the United States Derivation, Validation, and Prognostic Utility of a Prediction Rule for Nonresponse to Clopidogrel: The ABCD-GENE Score Cardiovascular biomarkers in patients with acute decompensated heart failure randomized to sacubitril-valsartan or enalapril in the PIONEER-HF trial

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.