CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

科研文章

荐读文献

Relationship Between Hospital Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement Volume and Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Outcomes Early Versus Standard Discharge After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Predictors and Clinical Outcomes of Next-Day Discharge After Minimalist Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement 5-Year Outcomes Comparing Surgical Versus Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Multivalvular Heart Disease 2020 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines Early Surgery or Conservative Care for Asymptomatic Aortic Stenosis Conscious Sedation Versus General Anesthesia for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Variation in Practice and Outcomes Leaflet immobility and thrombosis in transcatheter aortic valve replacement Contemporary real-world outcomes of surgical aortic valve replacement in 141,905 low-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk patients
|<<... 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ...>>|

Review Article2020 Sep 21;S0033-0620(20)30158-4.

JOURNAL：Prog Cardiovasc Dis. Article Link

Mechanical circulatory support devices in advanced heart failure: 2020 and beyond

JL Vieira, HO Ventura, MR Mehra et al. Keywords: advanced heart failure; cardiogenic shock; hemocompatibility; INTERMACS; LVAD; left ventricular assist device; mechanical circulatory support

ABSTRACT

Substantial progress in the field of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) has expanded the treatment options for patients with advanced-stage heart failure (HF). Currently available MCS devices can be implanted percutaneously or surgically. They can also be configured to support the left, right, or both ventricles, offering varying levels of circulatory support. Short-term temporary MCS devices are primarily used in high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention, cardiogenic shock, and post-cardiac arrest, while durable left ventricular assist systems (LVAS) are increasingly utilized either as a bridge-to-transplant, bridge to decision, or as a destination therapy. The evolution from older pulsatile devices to continuous-flow LVAS and the incorporation of smaller pumps, with no valves, fewer moving parts, and improved hemocompatibility has translated into improved clinical outcomes, greater durability, fewer adverse events, and reduced overall cost of care. However, despite marked advances in device design and clinical management, determining MCS candidacy is often difficult and requires the integration of clinical, biomarker, imaging, exercise, and hemodynamic data. This review aims to provide a summary of the current use of short-term and durable MCS devices in the treatment of advanced-stage HF, highlighting several aspects of LVAS support and the challenges that remain.
>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