Key result
Transcatheter aortic valve implantation outcomes, including survival and morbidity, are reviewed to guide nursing care interventions and identify gaps in the current literature.
This review provides an overview of TAVI outcomes to enhance nurses' knowledge and improve patient care.
May support nursing care planning for TAVI patients; leaves open key literature gaps for prospective studies.
Aortic stenosis is a common valvular pathological finding in older adults. Currently, aortic valve replacement is the gold-standard treatment for severe symptomatic aortic stenosis. However, patients with advanced age and multiple comorbidities carry a significant operative risk. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) was developed with the goal of offering a less invasive alternative to symptomatic high-risk patients with aortic stenosis. Since the first successful TAVI procedure in 2002, TAVI has been used as a treatment option for patients at very high or prohibitive surgical risk in clinical feasibility trials, registries, and in ongoing randomized controlled trials. There are 2 transcatheter valves in widespread clinical application, with several others in different stages of development. This article provides an overview of TAVI outcomes including insertion options, procedural outcomes, morbidity, valve durability, short- to medium-term survival, and quality of life to guide nursing care interventions. Enhancing nurses' knowledge of the risks, benefits, and potential complications of TAVI will empower nurses in their role as patient advocates and educators and improve patient outcomes. Gaps in the current TAVI research literature are identified.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
McRae et al. (2012) conducted a review in Aortic stenosis. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) was evaluated. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation outcomes, including survival and morbidity, are reviewed to guide nursing care interventions and identify gaps in the current literature.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: