Transcatheter or surgical aortic valve replacement for patients with severe, symptomatic, aortic stenosis at low to intermediate surgical risk: A clinical practice guideline

BMJ (Online)

Volumn 354, Issue , 2016, Pages

  Vandvik, Per O ^a,b   Otto, Catherine M ^c   Siemieniuk, Reed A ^d,e   Bagur, Rodrigo ^f   Guyatt, Gordon H ^d   Lytvyn, Lyubov ^g   Whitlock, Richard ^d,h   Vartdal, Trond ⁱ   Brieger, David ^j   Aertgeerts, Bert ^k   Price, Susanna ^l   Foroutan, Farid ^d,m   Shapiro, Michael ⁿ   Mertz, Ray ⁿ   Spencer, Frederick A ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OSLO   (Norway)

^b INNLANDET HOSPITAL TRUST   (Norway)

^c UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^d MCMASTER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^e UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^f UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN ONTARIO   (Canada)

^g HOSPITAL FOR SICK CHILDREN RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Canada)

^h MCMASTER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

ⁱ OSLO UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Norway)

^j Department of Microbiology and Infectious Diseases   (Australia)

^k UNIVERSITY OF LEUVEN   (Belgium)

^l ROYAL BROMPTON HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^m TORONTO GENERAL HOSPITAL   (Canada)

ⁿ NONE   (Canada)

more..

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AORTA STENOSIS; AORTA VALVE REPLACEMENT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL PRACTICE; DISEASE SEVERITY; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE UTILIZATION; HUMAN; MORTALITY; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SURGICAL AORTIC VALVE REPLACEMENT; SURGICAL RISK; SYMPTOMATOLOGY; TRANSCATHETER AORTIC VALVE IMPLANTATION;

EID: 84990197514     PISSN: 09598146     EISSN: 17561833     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.i5085     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Leon MB, Smith CR, Mack MJ, et al. PARTNER 2 Investigators. Transcatheter or Surgical Aortic-Valve Replacement in Intermediate-Risk Patients. N Engl J Med 2016;374:1609-20. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1514616 pmid:27040324.
2. Nishimura RA, Otto CM, Bonow RO, et al. ACC/AHA Task Force Members. 2014 AHA/ACC Guideline for the Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease: executive summary: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. Circulation 2014;129:2440-92. doi:10.1161/CIR. 0000000000000029 pmid:24589852.
3. Vahanian A, Alfieri O, Andreotti F, et al. Joint Task Force on the Management of Valvular Heart Disease of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS). Guidelines on the management of valvular heart disease (version 2012). Eur Heart J 2012;33:2451-96. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehs109 pmid: 22922415.
4. Osnabrugge RL, Mylotte D, Head SJ, et al. Aortic stenosis in the elderly: disease prevalence and number of candidates for transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a meta-analysis and modeling study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013;62:1002-12. doi:10.1016/j. jacc.2013.05.015 pmid:23727214.
5. Otto CM. Timing of aortic valve surgery. Heart 2000;84:211-8. doi:10.1136/heart.84.2.211 pmid:10908267.
6. Laine C, Taichman DB, Mulrow C. Trustworthy clinical guidelines. Ann Intern Med 2011;154:774-5. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-154-11-201106070-00011 pmid:21646561.
7. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE, et al. GRADE Working Group. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 2008;336:924-6. doi:10.1136/bmj.39489.470347.AD pmid:18436948.
8. Alonso-Coello P, Oxman AD, Moberg J, et al. GRADE Working Group. GRADE Evidence to Decision (EtD) frameworks: a systematic and transparent approach to making well informed healthcare choices. 2: Clinical practice guidelines. BMJ 2016;353:i2089. doi:10. 1136/bmj.i2089 pmid:27365494.
9. Foroutan F, Guyatt GH, OBrien K, et al. Prognosis after surgical replacement with a bioprosthetic aortic valve in patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis: systematic review of observational studies. BMJ 2016;354:i5065. doi:10.1136/bmj.i5065.
10. Siemieniuk RA, Agoritsas T, Manja V, et al. Transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with severe aortic stenosis at low and intermediate risk: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ 2016;354:i5130. doi:10.1136/bmj.i5130.
11. Nielsen HH, Klaaborg KE, Nissen H, et al. 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. EuroIntervention 2012;8:383-9. doi:10.4244/EIJV8I3A58 pmid:22581299.
12. Adams DH, Popma JJ, Reardon MJ, et al. U.S. CoreValve Clinical Investigators. Transcatheter aortic-valve replacement with a self-expanding prosthesis. N Engl J Med 2014;370:1790-8. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1400590 pmid:24678937.
13. Sondergaard L, Steinbrchel DA, Ihlemann N, et al. Two-year outcomes in patients with severe aortic valve stenosis randomized to transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement: the All-Comers Nordic Aortic Valve Intervention Randomized Clinical Trial. Circ Cardiovasc Interv 2016;9:e003665. doi:10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.115. 003665 pmid:27296202.
14. Thyregod HG, Steinbrchel DA, Ihlemann N, et al. Transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with severe aortic valve stenosis: 1-year results from the All-Comers NOTION Randomized Clinical Trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 2015;65:2184-94. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2015.03.014 pmid:25787196.
15. Sun X, Briel M, Walter SD, Guyatt GH. Is a subgroup effect believable? Updating criteria to evaluate the credibility of subgroup analyses. BMJ 2010;340:c117. doi:10.1136/bmj. c117 pmid:20354011.
16. Lytvyn L, Guyatt GH, Manja V, et alPatient values and preferences on transcatheter or surgical aortic valve replacement therapy for aortic stenosis: a systematic review. BMJ Open 2016;6:e014327. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014327.
17. Lauck SB, Baumbusch J, Achtem L, et al. Factors influencing the decision of older adults to be assessed for transcatheter aortic valve implantation: An exploratory study. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs 2015;1474515115612927.pmid:26498908.
18. Hussain AI, Garratt AM, Brunborg C, Aakhus S, Gullestad L, Pettersen KI. Eliciting patient risk willingness in clinical consultations as a means of improving decision-making of aortic valve replacement. J Am Heart Assoc 2016;5:e002828. doi:10.1161/JAHA.115. 002828 pmid:26994130.