INTEGRITTY, a group dedicated the appraisal of evidence to support optimized patient management, published a paper highlighting concerns surrounding major TAVR versus SAVR studies. While their findings do not aim to directly discredit the studies, they do raise questions about the integrity of their methodology.
ALERT!
This site is not optimized for Internet Explorer 8 (or older).
Please upgrade to a newer version of Internet Explorer or use an alternate browser such as Chrome or Firefox.
Cardiac
January 6, 2023
This study compares the clinical outcomes of two operative strategies for type A aortic dissection with true lumen collapse and malperfusion downstream, which is associated with a devastating prognosis.
January 6, 2023
A study found that insured Black patients who need mitral valve replacement surgery are more likely to undergo open heart surgery, while their white counterparts are more likely to have minimally invasive surgery.
January 3, 2023
This video presents an interesting case of pulmonary valve mass excision via a minimally invasive left anterior thoracotomy approach.
December 29, 2022
This year, CTSNet published a variety of educational content, including webinars, clinical videos, and more. We are closing out another year with a roundup of the top-viewed content published on our global platform throughout 2022.
December 27, 2022
This year, adult cardiac submissions to CTSNet spanned a variety of fascinating procedures, from mammary artery harvesting to the innovative Y-incision technique for aortic annular enlargement. Read on for a quick overview of the most popular adult cardiac articles and videos on CTSNet in 2022 and stay tuned for many more in 2023.
December 22, 2022
This is a featured profile interview with Dr. Victor Dayan, a cardiac surgeon in Uruguay.
December 21, 2022
Aortic root replacement and aortic arch replacement surgeries were performed on patients in Odisha, India for the first time recently.
December 21, 2022
A comparative study between five types of transcatheter heart valves found that although adverse outcome rates are low among all devices, some differences do stand out.