CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Percutaneous LAA Occlusion

Abstract

Recommended Article

Does pulsed field ablation regress over time? A quantitative temporal analysis of pulmonary vein isolation Transseptal puncture versus patent foramen ovale or atrial septal defect access for left atrial appendage closure 2015 ACC/HRS/SCAI Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion Device Societal Overview Expert Recommendations on Cardiac Computed Tomography for Planning Transcatheter Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion Percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion: the Munich consensus document on definitions, endpoints, and data collection requirements for clinical studies Dabigatran dual therapy with ticagrelor or clopidogrel after percutaneous coronary intervention in atrial fibrillation patients with or without acute coronary syndrome: a subgroup analysis from the RE-DUAL PCI trial Initial Worldwide Experience With the WATCHMAN Left Atrial Appendage System for Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation Percutaneous Left Atrial Appendage Transcatheter Occlusion (PLAATO System) to Prevent Stroke in High-Risk Patients With Non-Rheumatic Atrial Fibrillation: Results From the International Multi-Center Feasibility Trials

Editorial2020 Apr 6;S0828-282X(20)30316-0.

JOURNAL:Can J Cardiol. Article Link

Precision Medicine in TAVR: How to Select the Right Device for the Right Patient

G Marquis-Gravel, S Vemulapalli, AW Asgar et al. Keywords: patient selection; TAVR

ABSTRACT

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) represents a first-line option for the treatment of patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis across the entire spectrum of surgical risks. Given the expected growth of TAVR procedures in low-risk patients, many factors other than the primary endpoints of pivotal TAVR trials (either death, or the composite of death or stroke) need to be considered during the selection of a treatment strategy. Such factors include the risk of procedural complications (permanent pacemaker implantation, stroke, new-onset atrial fibrillation, vascular complications, etc), device hemodynamic performance and durability (paravalvular leak [PVL], reinterventions), indication for antithrombotic therapy, and patient quality of life. The pivotal TAVR trials have indicated that some complications with TAVR vs surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) vary according to the device under study. For example, rates of permanent pacemaker implantation were higher with TAVR vs SAVR in trials evaluating self-expanding valves, but not in the those evaluating balloon-expandable valves. TAVR represents a suitable option for all risk groups, but how do we personalise care and select the most appropriate device for our patients?