Stackwoods3921

PPM implantation for HAVB or CHB occurred in 234 patients (16%) within 30days after TAVR. The incidence of PPM implantation was 2.7% in the early discharge group, 41% in the group with higher risk for HAVB or CHB, and 100% in the PPM group.

The 2019 consensus algorithm safely identifies patients with no need for PPM implantation. This strategy allows more uniform management of TAVR patients and facilitates early discharge of low-risk patients without prolonged monitoring in 3 of 4 patients. However, the algorithm is less precise in the identification of high-risk patients.

The 2019 consensus algorithm safely identifies patients with no need for PPM implantation. This strategy allows more uniform management of TAVR patients and facilitates early discharge of low-risk patients without prolonged monitoring in 3 of 4 patients. However, the algorithm is less precise in the identification of high-risk patients.

The aim of this study was to assess the outcomes of severe prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) in the TVT (Transcatheter Valve Therapy) Registry in patients undergoing supra-annular transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) for de novo stenosis or failed surgical bioprostheses (transcatheter aortic valve [TAV]-in-surgical aortic valve [SAV]).

Severe PPM has been associated with adverse outcomes following TAVR, yet the clinical outcome of severe PPM after supra-annular TAVR is largely unknown.

Supra-annular TAVR was performed in patients enrolled in the TVT Registry with de novo stenosis (n=42,174) or TAV-in-SAV (n=5,446). Valve Academic Research Consortium-3 criteria were used to define severe PPM. The clinical impact of severe PPM on 1-year mortality and valve-related readmission was assessed using multivariate regression. A generalized linear mixed model was used to evaluate predictors of severe PPM.

Severe PPM was found in 5.3% of patients undergoing de novo TAVR and 27.0% of patients undergoing p is needed to determine if higher residual gradients in patients with severe PPM predict long-term outcomes. (STS/ACC Transcatheter Valve Therapy Registry [TVT Registry]; NCT01737528).

This study sought to determine the safety of the BASILICA (bioprosthetic or native aortic scallop intentional laceration to prevent iatrogenic coronary artery obstruction) procedure.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement causes coronary artery obstruction in 0.7% of cases, with 40% to 50% mortality. BASILICA is a procedure to prevent coronary obstruction. Safety and feasibility in a large patient cohort is lacking.

The international BASILICA registry was a retrospective, multicenter, real-world registry of patients at risk of coronary artery obstruction undergoing BASILICA and transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 definitions were used to adjudicate events.

Between June 2017 and December 2020, 214 patients were included from 25 centers in North America and Europe; 72.8% had bioprosthetic aortic valves and 78.5% underwent solo BASILICA. Leaflet traversal was successful in 94.9% and leaflet laceration in 94.4%. Partial or complete coronary artery obstruction was seen in 4.7%. Procedure success, defined as successful BASILICA traversal and laceration without mortality, coronary obstruction, or emergency intervention, was achieved in 86.9%. Thirty-day mortality was 2.8% and stroke was 2.8%, with 0.5% disabling stroke. Tanespimycin Thirty-day death and disabling stroke were seen in 3.4%. Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 composite safety was achieved in 82.8%. One-year survival was 83.9%. Outcomes were similar between solo and doppio BASILICA, between native and bioprosthetic valves, and with the use of cerebral embolic protection.

BASILICA is safe, with low reported rates of stroke and death. BASILICA is feasible in the real-world setting, with a high procedure success rate and low rates of coronary artery obstruction.

BASILICA is safe, with low reported rates of stroke and death. BASILICA is feasible in the real-world setting, with a high procedure success rate and low rates of coronary artery obstruction.Bladder cancer remains a deadly disease despite recent advances. Research advances should focus on improving quality of life for bladder cancer patients from time of initial diagnosis through end of life, with an emphasis on stratifying patients into appropriate risk categories and developing effective treatments to eliminate the need for bladder removal. Future research priorities should be prevention of disease, improved diagnostics, increased understanding of variant histologies and subgroups and targeting treatments, more effective therapies across disease states, advances in survivorship care to improve quality of life, improved access to clinical trials, and continued partnerships and multidisciplinary collaborations.The hallmark of precision medicine involves tailoring the treatment to the patient and/or tumor-specific biomarkers. Candidate biomarkers in bladder cancer are abundant, but few have been validated in clinical practice. Significant obstacles to precision medicine in bladder cancer include the limited predictive value of candidate biomarkers, lack of standardization in biomarker assessment, heterogeneity in biomarker expression and function, and limited insight into the biologic factors that influence biomarker expression and predictive capacity. This review summarizes key biomarkers explored in bladder cancer and outlines innovative trial designs to approach these obstacles.At diagnosis, more than 70% of bladder cancers (BCs) are at the non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) stages, which are usually treated with transurethral resection followed by intravesical instillation. For the remaining advanced cancers, systemic therapy is the standard of care, with addition of radical cystectomy in cases of locally advanced cancer. Because of the difference in treatment modalities, different models are needed to advance the care of NMIBC and advanced BC. This article gives a comprehensive review of both in vitro and in vivo BC models and compares the advantages and drawbacks of these preclinical systems in BC research.