14
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Predictors of Early Cerebrovascular Events in Patients With Aortic Stenosis Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Related collections

          Most cited references81

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Updated standardized endpoint definitions for transcatheter aortic valve implantation: the Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 consensus document.

          The aim of the current Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC)-2 initiative was to revisit the selection and definitions of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) clinical endpoints to make them more suitable to the present and future needs of clinical trials. In addition, this document is intended to expand the understanding of patient risk stratification and case selection. A recent study confirmed that VARC definitions have already been incorporated into clinical and research practice and represent a new standard for consistency in reporting clinical outcomes of patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis (AS) undergoing TAVI. However, as the clinical experience with this technology has matured and expanded, certain definitions have become unsuitable or ambiguous. Two in-person meetings (held in September 2011 in Washington, DC, USA, and in February 2012 in Rotterdam, the Netherlands) involving VARC study group members, independent experts (including surgeons, interventional and non-interventional cardiologists, imaging specialists, neurologists, geriatric specialists, and clinical trialists), the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and industry representatives, provided much of the substantive discussion from which this VARC-2 consensus manuscript was derived. This document provides an overview of risk assessment and patient stratification that need to be considered for accurate patient inclusion in studies. Working groups were assigned to define the following clinical endpoints: mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction, bleeding complications, acute kidney injury, vascular complications, conduction disturbances and arrhythmias, and a miscellaneous category including relevant complications not previously categorized. Furthermore, comprehensive echocardiography recommendations are provided for the evaluation of prosthetic valve (dys)function. Definitions for the quality of life assessments are also reported. These endpoints formed the basis for several recommended composite endpoints. This VARC-2 document has provided further standardization of endpoint definitions for studies evaluating the use of TAVI, which will lead to improved comparability and interpretability of the study results, supplying an increasingly growing body of evidence with respect to TAVI and/or surgical aortic valve replacement. This initiative and document can furthermore be used as a model during current endeavors of applying definitions to other transcatheter valve therapies (for example, mitral valve repair). Copyright © 2012 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Severe Aortic Valve Stenosis

            Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is an option in certain high-risk surgical patients with severe aortic valve stenosis. It is unknown whether TAVR can be safely introduced to lower-risk patients.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Incidence, predictors, and outcomes of aortic regurgitation after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: meta-analysis and systematic review of literature.

              This study was designed to establish the incidence, impact, and predictors of post-transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) aortic regurgitation (AR). AR is an important limitation of TAVR with ill-defined predictors and unclear long-term impact on outcomes. Studies published between 2002 and 2012 with regard to TAVR were identified using an electronic search and reviewed using the random-effects model of DerSimonian and Laird. From 3,871 initial citations, 45 studies reporting on 12,926 patients (CoreValve [Medtronic CV Luxembourg S.a.r.l., Tolochenaz, Switzerland] n = 5,261 and Edwards valve [Edwards Lifesciences, Santa Ana, California] n = 7,279) were included in the analysis of incidence and outcomes of post-TAVR AR. The pooled estimate for moderate or severe AR post-TAVR was 11.7% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 9.6 to 14.1). Moderate or severe AR was more common with use of the CoreValve (16.0% vs. 9.1%, p = 0.005). The presence of moderate or severe AR post-TAVR increased mortality at 30 days (odds ratio: 2.95; 95% CI: 1.73 to 5.02) and 1 year (hazard ratio: 2.27; 95% CI: -1.84 to 2.81). Mild AR was also associated with an increased hazard ratio for mortality, 1.829 (95% CI: 1.005 to 3.329) that was overturned by sensitivity analysis. Twenty-five studies reported on predictors of post-TAVR AR. Implantation depth, valve undersizing, and Agatston calcium score (r = 0.47, p = 0.001) were identified as important predictors. Moderate or severe aortic regurgitation is common after TAVR and an adverse prognostic indicator of short- and long-term survival. Incidence of moderate or severe AR is higher with use of the CoreValve. Mild AR may be associated with increased long-term mortality. Therefore, every effort should be made to minimize AR by a comprehensive pre-procedural planning and meticulous procedural execution. Copyright © 2013 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal of the American College of Cardiology
                Journal of the American College of Cardiology
                Elsevier BV
                07351097
                August 2016
                August 2016
                : 68
                : 7
                : 673-684
                Article
                10.1016/j.jacc.2016.05.065
                27515325
                31e4046a-4b24-4270-af7d-c9b0f5f8a954
                © 2016
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article