Considering alternatives to transcatheter heart valves for managing patients with severe aortic valve stenosis.

Expert review of medical devices Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-04 DOI:10.1080/17434440.2023.2298716
Hesham Elzomor, Ahmed Elkoumy, Sandeep S Hothi, Osama Soliman
{"title":"Considering alternatives to transcatheter heart valves for managing patients with severe aortic valve stenosis.","authors":"Hesham Elzomor, Ahmed Elkoumy, Sandeep S Hothi, Osama Soliman","doi":"10.1080/17434440.2023.2298716","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is becoming the standard of care for severe symptomatic aortic stenosis (AS). Yet, some patients with AS are not indicated/eligible for TAVI. Several noninvasive, catheter-based or surgical alternatives exist, and other therapeutic options are emerging.</p><p><strong>Areas covered: </strong>This review provides an overview of non-TAVI options for severe AS. Non-invasive, transcatheter, and alternative surgical strategies are discussed, emphasizing their backgrounds, techniques, and outcomes.</p><p><strong>Expert opinion: </strong>Alternative therapies to TAVI, whether device-based or non-device-based, continue to evolve or emerge and provide either alternative treatments or a bridge to TAVI, for patients not meeting indications for, or having contraindications to TAVI.Although TAVI and SAVR are the current dominant therapies, there are still some patients that could benefit in the future from other alternatives.Data on alternative options for such patients are scarce. Many advantages and disadvantages arise when selecting a specific treatment strategy for individual patients.Head-to-head comparison studies could guide physicians toward better patient selection and procedural planning. Awareness of therapeutic options, indications, techniques, and outcomes should enable heart teams to achieve optimized patient selection. Furthermore, it can increase the use of these alternatives to optimize the management of AS among different patient populations.</p>","PeriodicalId":94006,"journal":{"name":"Expert review of medical devices","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert review of medical devices","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17434440.2023.2298716","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is becoming the standard of care for severe symptomatic aortic stenosis (AS). Yet, some patients with AS are not indicated/eligible for TAVI. Several noninvasive, catheter-based or surgical alternatives exist, and other therapeutic options are emerging.

Areas covered: This review provides an overview of non-TAVI options for severe AS. Non-invasive, transcatheter, and alternative surgical strategies are discussed, emphasizing their backgrounds, techniques, and outcomes.

Expert opinion: Alternative therapies to TAVI, whether device-based or non-device-based, continue to evolve or emerge and provide either alternative treatments or a bridge to TAVI, for patients not meeting indications for, or having contraindications to TAVI.Although TAVI and SAVR are the current dominant therapies, there are still some patients that could benefit in the future from other alternatives.Data on alternative options for such patients are scarce. Many advantages and disadvantages arise when selecting a specific treatment strategy for individual patients.Head-to-head comparison studies could guide physicians toward better patient selection and procedural planning. Awareness of therapeutic options, indications, techniques, and outcomes should enable heart teams to achieve optimized patient selection. Furthermore, it can increase the use of these alternatives to optimize the management of AS among different patient populations.

考虑采用经导管心脏瓣膜的替代方法来管理严重主动脉瓣狭窄的患者。
导言:经导管主动脉瓣植入术(TAVI)正成为治疗严重症状性主动脉瓣狭窄(AS)的标准疗法。然而,有些主动脉瓣狭窄患者并不适合/不符合经导管主动脉瓣植入术的条件。目前已有几种无创、导管或手术替代方法,其他治疗方案也在不断涌现:本综述概述了治疗严重 AS 的非 TAVI 方案。专家意见:虽然 TAVI 和 SAVR 是目前的主流疗法,但仍有一些患者未来可从其他替代疗法中获益。在为个别患者选择特定治疗策略时,会出现许多优缺点。头对头比较研究可以指导医生更好地选择患者和制定手术计划。对治疗方案、适应症、技术和结果的了解应能使心脏团队实现对患者的优化选择。此外,它还能提高这些替代方案的使用率,优化不同患者群体的强直性脊柱炎治疗。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信