Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26830097›Full record

ArticleClinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society2016

In-hospital outcome of transcatheter vs. surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with aortic valve stenosis: complete dataset of patients treated in 2013 in Germany.

Helge Möllmann, Kurt Bestehorn, Maike Bestehorn, Konstantinos Papoutsis, Eckart Fleck, Georg Ertl, Karl-Heinz Kuck, Christian Hamm

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
10.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

36 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 56 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement for pure aortic valve regurgitation: "on-label" versus "off-label" use of TAVR devices.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2019
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation in nonagenarians: insights from the German Aortic Valve Registry (GARY).Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2020
    Article
  5. Transvascular transcatheter aortic valve implantation in 2017.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2020
    Article
  6. Observational
  7. Graded murine wire-induced aortic valve stenosis model mimics human functional and morphological disease phenotype.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2019
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Determinants of prolonged hospitalization in patients who underwent trans-femoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation.Postepy w kardiologii interwencyjnej = Advances in interventional cardiology · 2019
    Article
  11. Heart Valve Disease Awareness Survey 2017: what did we achieve since 2015?Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2019
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Risk factors and outcome of postoperative delirium after transcatheter aortic valve replacement.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2018
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Pacemaker implantation after TAVI: predictors of AV block persistence.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2018
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Helge MöllmannKerckhoff Heart Center, Benekestrasse 2-8, 61231, Bad Nauheim, Germany. moellmann@me.com.
Kurt BestehornInstitut für klinische Pharmakologie, TU Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Maike BestehornInstitut für klinische Pharmakologie, TU Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Konstantinos PapoutsisDeutsche Gesellschaft für Kardiologie, Herz- und Kreislaufforschung, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Eckart FleckDeutsche Gesellschaft für Kardiologie, Herz- und Kreislaufforschung, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Georg ErtlDepartment of Internal Medicine I, Cardiology, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.
Karl-Heinz KuckSt. Georg Krankenhaus Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany.
Christian HammKerckhoff Heart Center, Benekestrasse 2-8, 61231, Bad Nauheim, Germany.
German Cardiac Society · DEKerckhoff Klinik · DETU Dresden · DEAsklepios Klinik St. Georg · DEUniversitätsklinikum Würzburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTransvascular (TV-AVI) or transapical (TA-AVI) aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a treatment option for patients with aortic stenosis being at high or prohibitive risk for surgical aortic valve implantation (SAVR). Randomized data demonstrated that these subgroups can safely been treated with TAVI. However, a comparison of SAVR and TAVI in intermediate and low-risk patients is missing. Therefore, the aim of the analysis was to compare TAVI and SAVR in all patients who were treated for aortic valve stenosis in Germany throughout 1 year.

methodsThe mandatory quality assurance collects data on the in-hospital outcome from all patients (n = 20,340) undergoing either SAVR or TAVI in Germany. In order to compare the different treatment approaches patients were categorized into four risk groups using the logistic EuroScore I (ES). In-hospital mortality and peri- and postprocedural complications were analyzed.

resultsThe in-hospital mortality did not differ between TV-AVI and SAVR in the low risk group (ES <10 %: TV-AVI 2.4 %, SAVR 2.0 %, p = 0.302) and was significantly higher for SAVR in all other risk groups (ES 10-20 %: TV-AVI 3.5 %, SAVR 5.3 %; p = 0.025; ES 20-30 %: TV-AVI 5.5 %, SAVR 12.2 %, p < 0.001; ES >30 %: TV-AVI 6.5 %, SAVR 12.9 %, p = 0.008). TA-AVI had a significantly higher mortality in all risk groups compared to TV-AVI. In comparison to SAVR, TA-AVI had a higher mortality in patients with ES <10, comparable mortality in ES 10-20 %, and lower mortality in patients with an ES >20 %. The overall stroke rate was 2.3 %. It occurred more frequently in patients with an ES <10 % treated with a transapical approach (SAVR 1.8 %, TV-AVI 1.9 %, TA-AVI 3.1 %, p < 0.01). There were no statistically significant differences in all other comparisons.

conclusionsThis study demonstrates that TAVI provides excellent outcomes in all risk categories. Compared with SAVR, TV-TAVI yields similar in-hospital mortality among low-risk patients and lower in-hospital mortality among intermediate and high-risk patient populations.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overAortic ValveAortic Valve StenosisCardiac CatheterizationFemaleGermanyHeart Valve Prosthesis ImplantationHospital MortalityHumansLogistic ModelsMaleMiddle AgedPostoperative ComplicationsQuality Indicators, Health CareRisk FactorsAortic stenosisAortic valve replacementTAVITAVRTranscatheter Aortic valve implantation

Identifiers

PMID26830097
OpenAlexW2280230047

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.