4.6 Article

Futility, Benefit, and Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

期刊

JACC-CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS
卷 7, 期 7, 页码 707-716

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2014.01.167

关键词

aortic valve stenosis; frailty; heart failure; outcomes; valve replacement

资金

  1. NIH [K23 HL116660]
  2. Washington University Institute of Clinical and Translational Sciences grant, National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences of the National Institutes of Health [UL1 TR000448, KL2 TR000450]
  3. Roche Diagnostics

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a transformative innovation that provides treatment for high or prohibitive surgical risk patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis who either were previously not referred for or were denied operative intervention. Trials have demonstrated improvements in survival and symptoms after TAVR versus medical therapy; however, there remains a sizable group of patients who die or lack improvement in quality of life soon after TAVR. This raises important questions about the need to identify and acknowledge the possibility of futility in some patients considered for TAVR. In this very elderly population, a number of factors in addition to traditional risk stratification need to be considered including multimorbidity, disability, frailty, and cognition in order to assess the anticipated benefit of TAVR. Consideration by a multidisciplinary heart valve team with broad areas of expertise is critical for assessing likely benefit from TAVR. Moreover, these complicated decisions should take place with clear communication around desired health outcomes on behalf of the patient and provider. The decision that treatment with TAVR is futile should include alternative plans to optimize the patient's health state or, in some cases, discussions related to end-of-life care. We review issues to be considered when making and communicating these difficult decisions. (J Am Coll Cardiol Intv 2014; 7: 707-16) (C) 2014 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据