Pulse Brain · Growing Health Evidence Index
Peer-reviewed

Effect of Cerebral Embolic Protection Devices on CNS Infarction in Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement

Michael J. Mack, Michael A. Acker, Annetine C. Gelijns, Jessica Overbey, Michael K. Parides, Jeffrey N. Browndyke, Mark A. Groh, Alan J. Moskowitz, Neal Jeffries, Gorav Ailawadi, Vinod H. Thourani, Ellen Moquete, Alexander Iribarne, Pierre Voisine, Louis P. Perrault, Michael E. Bowdish, Michel Bilello, Christos Davatzikos, Ralph Mangusan, Rachelle Winkle, Peter K. Smith, Robert E. Michler, Marissa A. Miller, Karen O’Sullivan, Wendy C. Taddei‐Peters, Eric A. Rose, Richard D. Weisel, Karen L. Furie, Emilia Bagiella, Claudia S. Moy, Patrick T. O’Gara, Steven R. Messé, for the Cardiothoracic Surgical Trials Network (CTSN)

JAMA · 2017

Read source ↗ All evidence

Summary

Importance: Stroke is a major complication of surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). Objective: To determine the efficacy and adverse effects of cerebral embolic protection devices in reducing ischemic central nervous system (CNS) injury during SAVR. Design, Setting, and Participants: A randomized clinical trial of patients with calcific aortic stenosis undergoing SAVR at 18 North American centers between March 2015 and July 2016. The end of follow-up was December 2016. Interventions: Use of 1 of 2 cerebral embolic protection devices (n = 118 for suction-based extraction and n = 133 for intra-aortic filtration device) vs a standard aortic cannula (control; n = 132) at the time of SAVR. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was freedom from clinical or radiographic CNS infarc

Source type
Peer-reviewed study
DOI
10.1001/jama.2017.9479
Catalogue ID
BFmokjo9ap-s3tg72
Pulse AI · ask about this record

Dig deeper with Pulse AI.

Pulse AI has read the whole catalogue. Ask about this record, its theme, or how the findings apply to UK farming and policy — every answer cites the underlying studies.