CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Congestive Heart Failure

Abstract

Recommended Article

Cardiovascular biomarkers in patients with acute decompensated heart failure randomized to sacubitril-valsartan or enalapril in the PIONEER-HF trial Haemodynamic-guided management of heart failure (GUIDE-HF): a randomised controlled trial How to diagnose heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: the HFA-PEFF diagnostic algorithm: a consensus recommendation from the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Machine learning based on biomarker profiles identifies distinct subgroups of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction Modifiable lifestyle factors and heart failure: A Mendelian randomization study 2019 ACC Expert Consensus Decision Pathway on Risk Assessment, Management, and Clinical Trajectory of Patients Hospitalized With Heart Failure A Report of the American College of Cardiology Solution Set Oversight Committee Guideline‐Directed Medical Therapy for Patients With Heart Failure With Midrange Ejection Fraction: A Patient‐Pooled Analysis From the KorHF and KorAHF Registries The Role of the Pericardium in Heart Failure: Implications for Pathophysiology and Treatment
|<<... 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 >>|

Review Article2019 May 25. pii: S0002-9149(19)30584-3.

JOURNAL：Am J Cardiol. Article Link

Meta-Analysis of Effectiveness and Safety of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Low-to-Intermediate Surgical Risk Cohort

Ando T, Ashraf S, Villablanca P et al. Keywords: transcatheter aortic valve implantation; surgical aortic valve replacement; low-to-intermediate surgical risk cohort

ABSTRACT

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has been used to treat high surgical risk cohorts but has been expanded to treat low-to-intermediate risk cohort as well. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the outcomes between TAVI and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in low-to-intermediate risk cohort. We queried PUBMED, EMBASE, and ClinicalTrial.gov for relevant articles. Randomized controlled trials that compared at least one of the outcomes of interest between TAVI and SAVR were included. Risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were pooled with a random-effects model to compare the risk of the primary outcome between the 2 procedures. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality or disabling/major stroke at 1 year. Seven studies with a total of 7,143 patients (3,665 TAVI) were included. All-cause mortality or disabling/major stroke at 30 days (6 studies, RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.03) was similar between TAVI and SAVR but was significantly lower in TAVI at 1 year (5 studies, RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.98). All-cause mortality was similar at both 30 days (7 studies, RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.21) and 1 year (6 studies, RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.04). Disabling/major stroke was similar between the 2 procedures (6 studies, RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.12) at 30 days but was significantly lower in TAVI at 1 year (5 studies RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.98). Age, gender, diabetes, and surgical risk score did not modulate the primary outcome. TAVI had a significantly lower composite of all-cause mortality or disabling/major stroke at 1 year compared with SAVR in low-to-intermediate surgical risk cohort.

Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

>CBS CBS 2019

> CBS 2019 REGISTRATION

> CBS 2019 PROGRAM

> CBS 2019 CALL FOR SCIENCE

> CBS 2019 SPOTLIGHTS

 CBSMD

> CBSMD WEBSITE REGISTRATION

> EDUCATION CENTER

> RECOMMANDED PAPER

> TOP 10 RESEARCH PAPER

> PRE-READING

CBS 2019 CBS 2019 FACULTY Education Resource CBSMD Scientific Library
Copyright ⓒ CBS MD Nanjing China. All rights reserved. 京ICP备16025898号-11
联系我们| Top