CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Abstract

Recommended Article

Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Severe Aortic Valve Stenosis: 1-Year Results From the All-Comers NOTION Randomized Clinical Trial Long-Term Durability of Transcatheter Heart Valves: Insights From Bench Testing to 25 Years Timing of intervention in asymptomatic patients with valvular heart disease Online Quantitative Aortographic Assessment of Aortic Regurgitation After TAVR: Results of the OVAL Study A prospective, randomised trial of transapical transcatheter aortic valve implantation vs. surgical aortic valve replacement in operable elderly patients with aortic stenosis: the STACCATO trial Temporal Trends in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in France: FRANCE 2 to FRANCE TAVI Ascending Aortic Length and Risk of Aortic Adverse Events: The Neglected Dimension Low Transvalvular Flow Rate Predicts Mortality in Patients With Low-Gradient Aortic Stenosis Following Aortic Valve Intervention

Original Research

JOURNAL:Circulation. Article Link

ACC19 Late Breaking Science and Simultaneous Publications

CBSMD


AMI without Cardiogenic Shock

Study Design: multicenter, prospective, randomized exploratory safety and feasibility trial, 50 patients (1:1 randomization) with anterior STEMI to LV unloading by using the Impella CP followed by immediate reperfusion (U-IR) versus delayed reperfusion after 30 minutes of unloading (U-DR).

Study Endpoints: The primary safety outcome was a composite of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events at 30 days. Efficacy parameters included the assessment of infarct size by using cardiac magnetic resonance imaging.

Editorial - Percutaneous Support Devices for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention


AMI without Cardiogenic Shock

Study Design: multicenter, randomized, open-label trial

Study Results: Follow-up was completed for 591 of 600 patients (98.5%). Mortality was not different between the IABP and the control group (66.3% versus 67.0%; relative risk, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.88–1.11; P=0.98). There were also no differences in recurrent myocardial infarction, stroke, repeat revascularization, or rehospitalization for cardiac reasons (all P>0.05). Survivors’ quality of life as assessed by the EuroQol 5D questionnaire and the New York Heart Association class did not differ between groups.

Editorial -