ライフサイエンスコーパス: TAVI

1 TAVI and SAVR readmission rates were also compared for p

2 TAVI for patients with CKD stage 4 is still considered c

3 TAVI induces an immediate decrease in hyperemic microvas

4 TAVI is associated with atrioventricular-conduction abno

5 TAVI is feasible in patients with CKD5D and in KT.

6 TAVI was successfully performed in all patients.

7 TAVI with or without a cerebral protection device (filte

8 TAVI-induced LBBB is an independent predictor of mortali

9 TAVI-PVE occurred at a slightly higher rate than reporte

10 TAVI-PVE was most frequent in the first year after impla

11 S(TF)], n=26) and transapical (ES(TA): n=25) TAVI.

12 ting System was used to propensity match 617 TAVI and 1981 SAVR patients using numerous patient risk

13 prospectively on 870 patients undergoing 877 TAVI procedures up until December 31, 2009.

14 Implantation of a TAVI was performed in 42 patients (97.7%), and 8 patient

15 d 81+/-8 years; 47 male) who had undergone a TAVI with the Medtronic-CoreValve bioprosthesis.

16 After TAVI, 53 patients (36.3%) showed no signs of periAR and

17 After TAVI, the incidence of myocardial injury was 17%, which

18 After TAVI, there were no differences in the short form-12 hea

19 After TAVI, transthoracic echocardiography is performed to ass

20 urvival was 83.4% after SAVR and 72.0% after TAVI (P=0.0015), whereas freedom from major adverse card

21 t in LVEF (from 27.7+/-6.0-35.2+/-11.1 after TAVI; P<0.0001).

22 BB was observed in 61 patients (30.2%) after TAVI, and had resolved in 37.7% and 57.3% at hospital di

23 +/- 0.17 cm(2) to 1.67 +/- 0.41 cm(2) after TAVI and 1.40 +/- 0.25 cm(2) at 5 years (p for post-TAVI

24 events was 80.9% after SAVR and 67.3% after TAVI (P<0.001).

25 incidence of periprosthetic leak >2+/4 after TAVI was higher in group A.

26 urvival was 97.1% after SAVR and 97.4% after TAVI (P=0.82).

27 sels in 15 patients with AS before and after TAVI and in 12 control patients.

28 diameter calculation (CAAD) before and after TAVI.

29 and the occurrence and evolution of AR after TAVI by using cardiac MRI.

30 ebral microinfarctions are more common after TAVI compared with SAVR but seem to have no negative eff

31 avalvular leakage is the major concern after TAVI.

32 rocedure DWMRI brain lesions at 2 days after TAVI in potentially protected territories.

33 Patients who died within 30 days after TAVI were excluded.

34 formed at baseline, 2 days, and 7 days after TAVI.

35 nts experience cognitive deterioration after TAVI.

36 The energy of forward waves doubled after TAVI, whereas the backward expansion wave increased by >

37 hs (E3), 1 (E4) year, and 2 years (E5) after TAVI.

38 HRQOL significantly improved early after TAVI and was maintained out to 1 year.

39 if </=0.8; negative if >0.8) was found after TAVI (P for interaction <0.001).

40 ation were significantly more frequent after TAVI compared with SAVR.

41 on neurological and cognitive function after TAVI and to devise methods that will provide more comple

42 on the evolution of cognitive function after TAVI.

43 001) of new microinfarcts were greater after TAVI than after SAVR.

44 Improvement in coronary hemodynamics after TAVI was most pronounced in patients without post-TAVI a

45 om 46 +/- 18 mm Hg to 10 +/- 4.5 mm Hg after TAVI and 11.8 +/- 5.7 mm Hg at 5 years (p for post-TAVI

46 01-2.03]), leucocyte count </=72 hours after TAVI (OR, 1.05 [1.02-1.09]) and European System for Card

47 9+/-8 years; men, 57%) who suffered IE after TAVI of 7944 patients after a mean follow-up of 1.1+/-1.

48 atients with AS before and immediately after TAVI and in 28 patients without AS.

49 1) patients requiring PPM implantation after TAVI (PPM after TAVI), (2) patients without PPM before o

50 nversely, negative FFR values improved after TAVI (0.92+/-0.06 versus 0.93+/-0.07).

51 y artery pressure immediately improved after TAVI in patients with postcapillary combined (57.8+/-14.

52 tenosis <50) tended toward improvement after TAVI (0.90+/-0.07 versus 0.91+/-0.09; P=0.69).

53 transient or absent) LBBB after TAVI with a balloon-expandable valve and its clinical co

54 erate-to-severe periprosthetic leakage after TAVI.

55 he difference in volume of new lesions after TAVI in potentially protected territories.

56 minations before, during, and 3 months after TAVI were used to identify high-intensity transient sign

57 elated quality of life during 6 months after TAVI when compared with SAVR.

58 d in 140 patients within 1 to 3 months after TAVI with the Edwards Sapien XT THV to assess the presen

59 erwent cardiac MRI 1 week and 6 months after TAVI.

60 State Examination before and 6 months after TAVI.

61 a strong predictor of 1-year mortality after TAVI (hazard ratio, 3.28; P=0.005).

62 All-cause mortality after TAVI is higher in patients who develop LBBB than in pati

63 The 30-day mortality after TAVI was 13% and was independently predicted by myocardi

64 ndependently predicts 1-year mortality after TAVI, and provides additional prognostic information tha

65 pendent predictor for 30-day mortality after TAVI.

66 onse to treatment and 1-year mortality after TAVI.

67 I), (2) patients without PPM before or after TAVI (no PPM), and (3) patients with PPM before TAVI (PP

68 We compared the outcome after TAVI and SAVR of low-risk patients (European System for

69 of blood products, may improve outcome after TAVI.

70 amic presentation on clinical outcomes after TAVI is unknown.

71 in relation to early clinical outcomes after TAVI, there are few data on outcomes beyond 1 year in an

72 onstrated favorable long-term outcomes after TAVI.

73 AKI occurred in 21% of the patients after TAVI.

74 Because periAR after TAVI might be associated with adverse outcome, precise q

75 er baseline risk compared with the PPM after TAVI and no PPM patients (coronary artery disease: 77.1%

76 terval [CI]: 1.51 to 3.72) for the PPM after TAVI group, 2.75 (95% CI: 1.52 to 4.97) for the PPM befo

77 8 patients (27.8%) belonged to the PPM after TAVI group, 48 patients (13.6%) belonged to the PPM befo

78 ality was similar in all 3 groups (PPM after TAVI group: 19.4%, PPM before TAVI group: 22.9%, no PPM

79 iring PPM implantation after TAVI (PPM after TAVI), (2) patients without PPM before or after TAVI (no

80 Prosthetic valve endocarditis (PVE) after TAVI is a serious complication, but only limited data ex

81 LV functional and structural recovery after TAVI.

82 flow velocity with AS that is restored after TAVI, suggesting an acute relief of excess compression i

83 pressure, which was partially restored after TAVI.

84 Midterm to long-term survival after TAVI was encouraging in this high-risk patient populatio

85 Overall 30-day and 1-year survival after TAVI were 91.9% (95% CI, 91.1% to 92.8%) and 79.2% (CI,

86 ied as a predictor of midterm survival after TAVI.

87 Median survival time after TAVI was 3.4 years (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.6 to

88 investigation of cognitive trajectory after TAVI is pivotal.

89 Nevertheless, FFR variations after TAVI are minor and crossed the diagnostic cutoff of 0.8

90 Functional FFR variations after TAVI changed the indication to treat the coronary stenos

91 secondary end point, new lesion volume after TAVI was lower in the filter group (242 mm3 [95% CI, 159

92 Positive FFR values worsened after TAVI (0.71+/-0.11 versus 0.66+/-0.14).

93 percent diameter stenosis >50 worsened after TAVI (0.84+/-0.12 versus 0.82+/-0.16; P=0.02), whereas F

94 The incidence of IE at 1 year after TAVI was 0.50%, and the risk increased with the use of o

95 ce, 0.67%, 0.50% within the first year after TAVI).

96 patients throughout the first 2 years after TAVI, despite the high intrinsic risk for cognitive dete

97 ive impairment along the first 2 years after TAVI.

98 ry was established to report outcomes of all TAVI procedures performed within the United Kingdom.

99 All TAVIs performed in France, as listed in the FRANCE 2 reg

100 Although TAVI is becoming a mature technique, the impact of sex d

101 Aortic atheroma (TAVI) and concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting (S

102 I (no PPM), and (3) patients with PPM before TAVI (PPM before TAVI).

103 75 (95% CI: 1.52 to 4.97) for the PPM before TAVI group, and 2.24 (95% CI: 1.62 to 3.09) for the no P

104 patients (13.6%) belonged to the PPM before TAVI group, and 207 patients (58.6%) belonged to the no

105 ups (PPM after TAVI group: 19.4%, PPM before TAVI group: 22.9%, no PPM group: 18.0%) in unadjusted an

106 The PPM before TAVI patients had a significantly higher baseline risk c

107 3) patients with PPM before TAVI (PPM before TAVI).

108 Classification of CKD stages before TAVI allows risk stratification for early and midterm cl

109 statistically significant difference between TAVI and SAVR in early (odds ratio [OR], 1.01 [95% CI, 0

110 tatistically significant differences between TAVI and SAVR patients in short-term readmission rates.

111 -0.1 in AS (P<0.005) and was not restored by TAVI.

112 brovascular events, cognitive status, direct TAVI, cerebral embolism in diffusion-weighted MRI, or th

113 e diagnosis was established correctly during TAVI, only 1 of 4 patients died (25%).

114 The correct diagnosis was established during TAVI procedures in 4 and postmortem in 2 patients.

115 prognostic value of myocardial injury during TAVI.

116 The amount of contrast medium during TAVI was not associated with the development of acute ki

117 lay a major role in events that occur during TAVI, post-procedural events might also be related to a

118 structures in the device landing zone during TAVI is a life-threatening complication that can be trea

119 been thoroughly investigated in very elderly TAVI cohorts.

120 ected in a multicenter registry encompassing TAVI patients from 2005 until 2010.

121 y be overestimated owing to rapidly evolving TAVI technology.

122 ure of the aortic root in balloon-expandable TAVI is associated with severe prosthesis oversizing.

123 9+/-0.19 cm(2)) underwent balloon-expandable TAVI using the EdwardsSAPIEN Transcatheter Heart Valve (

124 f this complication after balloon-expandable TAVI.

125 atching group of patients undergoing femoral TAVI.

126 tients who suffered symptomatic CO following TAVI of 6,688 patients (0.66%).

127 Symptomatic CO following TAVI was a rare but life-threatening complication that o

128 Very little data exist on CO following TAVI.

129 h (interquartile range: 0 to 72 h) following TAVI.

130 on disturbances developed new LBBB following TAVI with a balloon-expandable valve, although it was tr

131 ta exist on the occurrence of NOAF following TAVI.

132 is known about long-term outcomes following TAVI.

133 he only factor associated with PPI following TAVI (p < 0.001).

134 The subclavian approach for TAVI is safe and feasible, with procedural and medium-te

135 process to develop specific definitions for TAVI clinical research should provide consistency across

136 Composite endpoints for TAVI safety and effectiveness were also recommended.

137 election of lower surgical risk patients for TAVI.

138 Also, reasons for readmission for TAVI and SAVR patients were examined and compared.

139 evidence suggests that patient selection for TAVI is shifting toward lower surgical risk patients.

140 FRANCE TAVI participants were older but at lower surgical risk

141 ioprostheses Established by Catheter [FRANCE TAVI]; NCT01777828).

142 A total of 12,804 patients from FRANCE TAVI and 4,165 patients from FRANCE 2 were included in t

143 ed from 95.3% in FRANCE 2 to 96.8% in FRANCE TAVI (p < 0.001).

144 were 4.4% and 5.4%, respectively, in FRANCE TAVI compared with 8.2% and 10.1%, respectively, in FRAN

145 More than 80% of patients in FRANCE TAVI underwent transfemoral TAVR.

146 15 were prospectively included in the FRANCE TAVI (French Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation) re

147 The FRANCE TAVI registry provided reassuring data regarding trends

148 Mean time from TAVI was 6 months (interquartile range, 1-14 months).

149 in daily practice when this third-generation TAVI device is used.

150 for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and its impact on clinical outcomes.

151 of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for p

152 ing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR), but

153 ing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and to decipher the impact of this peri-procedural

154 ing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and whether it is associated with mortality.

155 ble transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) by means of pre- and postinterventional multislice

156 of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) clinical endpoints to make them more suitable to t

157 ter transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) compared with surgical aortic valve replacement (S

158 for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) compared with those of the femoral approach by usi

159 by transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) decreases ventricular afterload and is expected to

160 ter transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) during the same procedure.

161 in transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) for high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis

162 ter transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has been associated with poor outcomes, but little

163 ly, transcatheter aortic-valve implantation (TAVI) has been suggested as a less invasive treatment fo

164 Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has emerged as a therapeutic alternative for patie

165 Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has emerged as an important treatment for patients

166 Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has evolved to a treatment of choice in high-risk

167 of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in high-risk patients is leading to the expansion

168 out transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in patients with low ejection fraction.

169 of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in pure native aortic valve regurgitation (NAVR) f

170 ter transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in the Multicenter Canadian Experience study, with

171 Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a novel therapy for treatment of severe aortic

172 ter transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a rare complication, which is diagnosed based o

173 Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is an advancing mode of treatment for inoperable o

174 Transcatheter aortic-valve implantation (TAVI) is an emerging intervention for the treatment of h

175 Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is associated with a higher risk of neurological e

176 Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is known to be associated with silent cerebral inj

177 Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is superior to standard medical therapy and noninf

178 ing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) present with low-ejection fraction, low-gradient (

179 Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) using the Medtronic CoreValve (MCV) system might r

180 ing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) who suffered coronary obstruction (CO).

181 ing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with a balloon-expandable valve.

182 ent transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with the SAPIEN 3 (mean age, 81.6+/-6.6 years; 48.

183 ith transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), regardless of technology or access route, and to

184 ing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI).

185 ing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI).

186 ter transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI).

187 ing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI).

188 ral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI).

189 for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI).

190 ith transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI).

191 ing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI).

192 ter transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI).

193 of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI).

194 ter transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI).

195 ter transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI).

196 ter transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI).

197 asure for which there is limited evidence in TAVI populations.

198 sensus recommendations for implementation in TAVI clinical research programs.

199 Physical component score in TAVI increased after 30 days (32.1+/-6.6 versus 38.9+/-7

200 total volume per microinfarct was smaller in TAVI than in SAVR (0.23+/-0.24 versus 0.76+/-1.8 mL; P=0

201 efinitions accessible to all stakeholders in TAVI clinical research through a peer reviewed publicati

202 The U.K. TAVI (United Kingdom Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implanta

203 ospective registry study reflected real-life TAVI experience in high-risk elderly patients with aorti

204 tically different for all propensity-matched TAVI and SAVR patients (respective rates, 18.8% and 19.3

205 sitioning of the prosthesis using a modified TAVI technique and immediate additional intraprocedural

206 ary hemodynamics and the immediate effect of TAVI.

207 analyze safety, feasibility, and efficacy of TAVI in patients with severe left ventricular dysfunctio

208 re necessary before expanding indications of TAVI toward lower-risk patients.

209 The integration of TAVI into daily clinical practice should be guided by ac

210 model was used to verify the interaction of TAVI effect with the FFR values.

211 These findings indicate that outcome of TAVI may be improved by more restrictive use of blood tr

212 mporary European trends and good outcomes of TAVI in daily practice when this third-generation TAVI d

213 This analysis aims to describe outcomes of TAVI versus SAVR in low-risk patients.

214 type did not influence the mortality risk of TAVI-induced LBBB.

215 An increased risk of TAVI-PVE was seen in patients with low implanted valve p

216 ns were associated with an increased risk of TAVI-PVE.

217 Antithrombotic therapy in the setting of TAVI has been empirically determined, and unfractionated

218 efinitions for studies evaluating the use of TAVI, which will lead to improved comparability and inte

219 AS or TAVI did not alter diastolic velocity time integral.

220 One hundred eleven patients (TAVI, n=71; SAVR, n=40) were studied.

221 Also in these critically ill patients, TAVI provides clinical amelioration, with early improvem

222 sfemoral procedures, and in 50% of patients, TAVI was performed without aortic balloon valvuloplasty.

223 ectively from 14 centers that have performed TAVI for NAVR.

224 Post-TAVI MDCT identified THV thrombosis in 5 patients (4%).

225 Post-TAVI MDCT is a valuable tool for the diagnosis of THV th

226 Post-TAVI multislice computed tomography data sets were avail

227 %, life-threatening bleeding of 5%, and post-TAVI pacemaker implantation of 12%.

228 Median relative change in CAAD pre- and post-TAVI was -0.5% (interquartile range, 3.6%).

229 d 1.40 +/- 0.25 cm(2) at 5 years (p for post-TAVI trend <0.01).

230 nd 11.8 +/- 5.7 mm Hg at 5 years (p for post-TAVI trend = 0.06).

231 Pre-TAVI CAAD was 23.1+/-1.8 mm; post-TAVI CAAD was 22.9+/-1.3 mm.

232 +/-15.47 pre-TAVI to 56.56+/-17.44 cm/s post-TAVI (P=0.003).

233 hereas 2 (40%) did not receive standard post-TAVI dual-antiplatelet therapy.

234 with controls, which remained unaltered post-TAVI.

235 was most pronounced in patients without post-TAVI aortic regurgitation.

236 Pre-TAVI CAAD was 23.1+/-1.8 mm; post-TAVI CAAD was 22.9+/-1

237 Pre-TAVI computed tomography data was available in 28 CO pat

238 creased significantly from 46.24+/-15.47 pre-TAVI to 56.56+/-17.44 cm/s post-TAVI (P=0.003).

239 relative difference in diameter between pre-TAVI CAAD and nominal diameter of the selected prosthesi

240 Compared with SAVR, TAVI may have similar or better early and midterm outcom

241 Observational Study of Effectiveness of SAVR-TAVI Procedures for Severe Aortic Stenosis Treatment (OB

242 Observational Study of Effectiveness of SAVR-TAVI Procedures for Severe Aortic Stenosis Treatment) tr

243 ed a single-center study that subcategorized TAVI patients into quartiles (Q1 to Q4) defined by enrol

244 The 5-year outcomes following successful TAVI with a balloon-expandable valve were evaluated in 8

245 s is the first study providing evidence that TAVI results in cognitive improvement among patients who

246 s independent of MR severity suggesting that TAVI should not be withheld from symptomatic patients wi

247 The TAVI patients were included prospectively in a dedicated

248 gly growing body of evidence with respect to TAVI and/or surgical aortic valve replacement.

249 III or IV symptoms, the use of a transapical TAVI approach, and a higher amount of periprosthetic reg

250 erences between transfemoral and transapical TAVI or between the MCV and ES prostheses.

251 modified procedural strategy of transapical TAVI with a balloon-expandable prosthesis was associated

252 ger LA size and those undergoing transapical TAVI.

253 total of 358 patients underwent transapical TAVI with balloon-expandable prostheses.

254 Transfemoral TAVI provided mortality benefits over SAVR in trials.

255 rsely among patients undergoing transfemoral TAVI.

256 evere aortic stenosis underwent transfemoral TAVI at 2 institutions.

257 aortic valve stenosis underwent transfemoral TAVI.

258 loon-expandable ES stent valve, transfemoral TAVI with the self-expandable MCV prosthesis resulted in

259 rty-three patients treated with transfemoral TAVI underwent cardiac MRI 1 week and 6 months after TAV

260 , patients were randomly assigned to undergo TAVI with a cerebral protection device (filter group) or

261 ients with no prior history of AF undergoing TAVI and its incidence was increased in patients with la

262 matic severe aortic stenosis (AS) undergoing TAVI.

263 n age 80 +/- 0.6 years; 49% male) undergoing TAVI consented to participate.

264 F-LG patients with >/=moderate MR undergoing TAVI had significantly lower all-cause mortality (hazard

265 However, patients undergoing TAVI are also at high risk for both bleeding and stroke

266 nical outcomes of LEF-LG patients undergoing TAVI is unknown.

267 Of 606 consecutive patients undergoing TAVI, 113 (18.7%) patients with LEF-LG severe aortic ste

268 Of 606 consecutive patients undergoing TAVI, 433 (71.4%) patients with severe aortic stenosis a

269 late mortality in LEF-LG patients undergoing TAVI.

270 is prevalent in >50% of patients undergoing TAVI.

271 in level on mortality in patients undergoing TAVI.

272 in higher surgical risk patients undergoing TAVI.

273 ients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing TAVI at the University of Leipzig Heart Center.

274 ients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing TAVI, the use of a cerebral protection device reduced th

275 679 patients analyzed, 387 (57.0%) underwent TAVI with the Medtronic CoreValve System and 292 (43.0%)

276 istory of atrial fibrillation (AF) underwent TAVI with a balloon-expandable valve.

277 A total of 43 patients underwent TAVI with the CoreValve prosthesis (Medtronic, Minneapol

278 five patients with aortic stenosis underwent TAVI with the Medtronic CoreValve or the Edwards Valve i

279 es of 618 consecutive patients who underwent TAVI at our institution between April 2008 and October 2

280 ately one-half of the patients who underwent TAVI because of a high or prohibitive surgical risk prof

281 patients with aortic stenosis who underwent TAVI was conducted.

282 from 642 consecutive patients who underwent TAVI were prospectively collected.

283 Surgeons score: 9.8 +/- 6.4%) who underwent TAVI with a balloon-expandable Edwards valve (transfemor

284 t pacemaker implantation (PPI) who underwent TAVI with a balloon-expandable valve were included.

285 the Italian CoreValve Registry who underwent TAVI with the subclavian approach were included.

286 potential procedure difficulties when using TAVI for severe NAVR.

287 ndent predictors of all-cause mortality were TAVI-induced LBBB (hazard ratio [HR], 1.54; confidence i

288 ngest associations for microinfarction were: TAVI (arch atheroma grade: r=0.46; P=0.0001) and SAVR (c

289 derly patients with aortic stenosis, in whom TAVI appeared to be a reasonable option.

290 cause (Kaplan-Meier analysis) was 30.7% with TAVI, as compared with 50.7% with standard therapy (haza

291 most common adverse effects associated with TAVI are heart block, vascular complications, and renal

292 st on the long-term outcomes associated with TAVI.

293 vents were observed after SAVR compared with TAVI.

294 We identified 18 patients diagnosed with TAVI-PVE during a median follow-up period of 1.4 years (

295 perable BACKGROUND: Data and experience with TAVI in the treatment of patients with pure severe NAVR

296 new-onset atrial fibrillation was lower with TAVI, but risk for pacemaker implantation, vascular comp

297 term (2- to 5-year) all-cause mortality with TAVI (OR, 1.28 [CI, 0.97 to 1.69]), whereas long-term mo

298 (OR, 0.91 [CI, 0.67 to 1.23]) mortality with TAVI.

299 By using cardiac MRI in patients with TAVI, a significant improvement of LV function, volume,

300 .7% with standard therapy (hazard ratio with TAVI, 0.55; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.40 to 0.74;

301 he increase in forward compression wave with TAVI was related to an increase in systolic velocity tim