BMC Cardiovascular Disorders (Oct 2024)

Preoperative visit-care for transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a review

  • JunYang Tan,
  • GuanXing Wei,
  • Fang Ma,
  • Han Yan,
  • XiTing Wang,
  • QiuLan Hu,
  • Wei Wei,
  • MingFang Yang,
  • YangJuan Bai

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12872-024-04241-y
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 24, no. 1
pp. 1 – 11

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Aim The aim of this review is to evaluate and summarize the evidence for preoperative visit-care of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and to provide evidence-based support for clinical intervention. Design The review presents an evidence summary report, following the standard of the Fudan University Center for Evidence-based Nursing. Methods Literature related to preoperative visit-care for transcatheter aortic valve replacement have been retrieved based on the “6S” pyramid model of evidence. The types of literature included systematic reviews, expert consensus, evidence summary, and guidelines. Data sources Up To Date, Cochrane Library, Joanna Briggs Institute, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, Medlive, American Heart Association, Registered Nurses Association of Ontario, Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network, European Society of Cardiology, American College of Cardiology, PubMed, CINAHL, Wanfang database, VIP database, Chinese biomedical literature database, CNKI. The search period is limited to the time when each database was established until February 2024. Results A total of 18 articles were included in this review, consisting of 1 systematic review, 1 evidence summary, 3 guidelines and 13 expert consensuses. This review summarized 30 pieces of the best evidence for preoperative visit-care for transcatheter aortic valve replacement, encompassing three evidence themes: multidisciplinary team collaboration, preoperative assessment, and preoperative education. Conclusion The study has established an ideal foundation of evidence for preoperative visit-care in TAVR. However, throughout the particular application process, it was crucial to assess the feasibility and relevance of the evidence in clinical practice by taking into account elements such as the application setting, recommendations from experts with diverse expertise, and the preferences of the patients.

Keywords