Transcatheter valve replacement for aortic stenosis: Balancing benefits, risks, and expectations

JAMA

Volumn 308, Issue 6, 2012, Pages 573-574

  Desai, Chintan S ^a   Bonow, Robert O ^a  

^a NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AORTA STENOSIS; ARTIFICIAL HEART PACEMAKER; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; DEVICE APPROVAL; DISEASE SEVERITY; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION; HEART BLOCK; HIGH RISK PATIENT; HUMAN; INCIDENCE; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MITRAL VALVE REGURGITATION; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT DECISION MAKING; PATIENT SAFETY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK BENEFIT ANALYSIS; RISK FACTOR; SHORT SURVEY; SURGICAL MORTALITY; SURGICAL RISK; TRANSCATHETER AORTIC VALVE IMPLANTATION; TREATMENT RESPONSE; AORTA VALVE; AORTA VALVE REGURGITATION; AORTA VALVE STENOSIS; ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); EMBOLISM; EUROPE; HEART CATHETERIZATION; HEART VALVE REPLACEMENT; INSTRUMENTATION; METHODOLOGY; PATIENT CARE; PATIENT PREFERENCE; PATIENT SELECTION; REGISTER; STATISTICS; STROKE; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UNITED STATES;

ANTICOAGULANT AGENT;

ANTICOAGULANTS; AORTIC VALVE; AORTIC VALVE INSUFFICIENCY; AORTIC VALVE STENOSIS; CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; EMBOLISM; EUROPE; HEART BLOCK; HEART CATHETERIZATION; HEART VALVE PROSTHESIS IMPLANTATION; HUMANS; PACEMAKER, ARTIFICIAL; PATIENT CARE TEAM; PATIENT PREFERENCE; PATIENT SELECTION; REGISTRIES; STROKE; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84864830640     PISSN: 00987484     EISSN: 15383598     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1001/jama.2012.9427     Document Type: Short Survey

References (9)

1. Gilard M, Eltchaninoff H, Iung B, et al; FRANCE 2 Investigators. Registry of transcatheter aortic-valve implantation in high-risk patients. N Engl J Med. 2012; 366(18):1705-1715.
2. Mack MJ, Holmes DR Jr. Rational dispersion for the introduction of transcatheter valve therapy. JAMA. 2011;306(19):2149-2150.
3. Kodali SK, Williams MR, Smith CR, et al; PARTNER Trial Investigators. Twoyear outcomes after transcatheter or surgical aortic-valve replacement. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(18):1686-1695.
4. Nietlispach F, Wijesinghe N, Gurvitch R, et al. An embolic deflection device for aortic valve interventions. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2010;3(11):1133-1138.
5. Zahn R, Gerckens U, Grube E, et al; German Transcatheter Aortic Valve Interventions- Registry Investigators. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation: first results from a multi-centre real-world registry. Eur Heart J. 2011;32(2):198-204.
6. Tamburino C, Capodanno D, Ramondo A, et al. Incidence and predictors of early and late mortality after transcatheter aortic valve implantation in 663 patients with severe aortic stenosis. Circulation. 2011;123(3):299-308.
7. Moat NE, Ludman P, de Belder MA, et al. Long-term outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation in high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis: the U.K. TAVI (United Kingdom Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation) Registry. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;58(20):2130-2138.
8. Smith CR, Leon MB, Mack MJ, et al; PARTNER Trial Investigators. Transcatheter versus surgical aortic-valve replacement in high-risk patients. N Engl J Med. 2011;364(23):2187-2198.
9. Piazza N, Otten A, Schultz C, et al. Adherence to patient selection criteria in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation with the 18F CoreValve ReValving System. Heart. 2010;96(1):19-26.