Download from app store
We have detected that you are using an Ad Blocker.
PracticeUpdate is free to end users but we rely on advertising to fund our site. Please consider supporting PracticeUpdate by whitelisting us in your ad blocker.
We have sent a message to the email address you have provided, . If this email is not correct, please update your settings with your correct address.
The email address you provided during registration, , does not appear to be valid. Please update your settings with a valid address before to continue using PracticeUpdate.
Please provide your AHPRA Number to ensure that you are given the correct level of access to our site.
featured
Published in Cardiology

Journal Scan / Research · December 18, 2024

TAVI and FFR-Guided PCI vs Conventional Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement and CABG for Patients With Aortic Valve Stenosis and Complex or Multivessel Coronary Disease

The Lancet

 

Additional Info

Disclosure statements are available on the authors' profiles:

The Lancet
TransCatheter aortic valve implantation and fractional flow reserve-guided percutaneous coronary intervention versus conventional surgical aortic valve replacement and coronary bypass grafting for treatment of patients with aortic valve stenosis and complex or multivessel coronary disease (TCW): an international, multicentre, prospective, open-label, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial
Lancet 2024 Dec 04;[EPub Ahead of Print], E Kedhi, RS Hermanides, JE Dambrink, SK Singh, JM Ten Berg, D van Ginkel, M Hudec, G Amoroso, IJ Amat-Santos, M Andreas, R Campante Teles, G Bonnet, E Van Belle, L Conradi, L van Garsse, W Wojakowski, V Voudris, J Sacha, P Cervinka, E Lipsic, S Somi, L Nombela-Franco, S Postma, K Piayda, G De Luca, E Kolkman, KP Malinowski, T Modine

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.

Further Reading