Transfemoral transcatheter aortic-valve replacement should be preferred over surgery in most intermediate-risk patients.

Evidence-Based Medicine Pub Date : 2016-10-01 Epub Date: 2016-08-08 DOI:10.1136/ebmed-2016-110484
Corrado Tamburino, Piera Capranzano
{"title":"Transfemoral transcatheter aortic-valve replacement should be preferred over surgery in most intermediate-risk patients.","authors":"Corrado Tamburino, Piera Capranzano","doi":"10.1136/ebmed-2016-110484","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Commentary on: 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[OpenUrl][1][CrossRef][2][PubMed][3].\n\nEvidence derived from randomised clinical trials support transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) as a choice for patients with aortic stenosis with a prohibitive surgical risk and as a valid alternative therapy for those at high-risk of surgical mortality. Owing to increases in operator experience as well as improvements with transcatheter techniques and devices associated with reduction in procedural complications, TAVR has been progressively extended to less risky patients,1 despite the lack of rigorous clinical-trial assessment of this expansion. In the Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves 2 (PARTNER-2) Cohort A randomised trial, safety and effectiveness of TAVR with a lower-profile second-generation valve system were compared with conventional surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients with intermediate-risk clinical …\n\n [1]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DN%2BEngl%2BJ%2BMed%26rft.volume%253D374%26rft.spage%253D1609%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.1056%252FNEJMoa1514616%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F27040324%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx\n [2]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1056/NEJMoa1514616&link_type=DOI\n [3]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=27040324&link_type=MED&atom=%2Febmed%2F21%2F5%2F173.atom","PeriodicalId":12182,"journal":{"name":"Evidence-Based Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1136/ebmed-2016-110484","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evidence-Based Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/ebmed-2016-110484","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2016/8/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Commentary on: 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[OpenUrl][1][CrossRef][2][PubMed][3]. Evidence derived from randomised clinical trials support transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) as a choice for patients with aortic stenosis with a prohibitive surgical risk and as a valid alternative therapy for those at high-risk of surgical mortality. Owing to increases in operator experience as well as improvements with transcatheter techniques and devices associated with reduction in procedural complications, TAVR has been progressively extended to less risky patients,1 despite the lack of rigorous clinical-trial assessment of this expansion. In the Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves 2 (PARTNER-2) Cohort A randomised trial, safety and effectiveness of TAVR with a lower-profile second-generation valve system were compared with conventional surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients with intermediate-risk clinical … [1]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DN%2BEngl%2BJ%2BMed%26rft.volume%253D374%26rft.spage%253D1609%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.1056%252FNEJMoa1514616%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F27040324%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [2]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1056/NEJMoa1514616&link_type=DOI [3]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=27040324&link_type=MED&atom=%2Febmed%2F21%2F5%2F173.atom
在大多数中等风险患者中,经股动脉导管主动脉瓣置换术应优于手术。
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