Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30530577›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2018

Comparative survival and role of STS score in aortic paravalvular leak after SAVR or TAVR: a retrospective study from the USA.

Ratnasari Padang, Mahmoud Ali, Kevin L Greason, Christopher G Scott, Manasawee Indrabhinduwat, Charanjit S Rihal, Mackram F Eleid, Vuyisile T Nkomo, Patricia A Pellikka, Sorin V Pislaru

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Paravalvular Leak: A Systemic Review.Current cardiology reviews · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

10 authors.

Ratnasari PadangDepartment of Cardiovascular Diseases, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1233-3924
Mahmoud AliDepartment of Cardiovascular Diseases, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Kevin L GreasonDepartment of Cardiovascular Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Christopher G ScottDivision of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1340-0647
Manasawee IndrabhinduwatDepartment of Cardiovascular Diseases, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Charanjit S RihalDepartment of Cardiovascular Diseases, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Mackram F EleidDepartment of Cardiovascular Diseases, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Vuyisile T NkomoDepartment of Cardiovascular Diseases, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Patricia A PellikkaDepartment of Cardiovascular Diseases, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Sorin V PislaruDepartment of Cardiovascular Diseases, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe presence of aortic paravalvular leak (PVL) is associated with lower survival, but a direct comparison of its impact after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) versus surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) has not been performed. This study sought to determine the differential influence of PVL on survival following TAVR versus SAVR and in patients with varying levels of risk as defined by the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) risk score.

methodsPatients with and without postprocedural PVL were identified from 2290 patients undergoing TAVR or SAVR at Mayo Clinic between 2008 and 2014. The primary endpoint was overall survival.

resultsThere were 588 patients with PVL (374 TAVR, 214 SAVR): age 78±11 years, 63% male and mean follow-up of 3±2 years. PVL was trivial/mild in 442 (75%) patients. In propensity-matched analyses (n=86 per group), the overall survival at 1 and 4 years was 93% and 56% vs 89% and 61% in patients with PVL after TAVR versus SAVR, respectively (p=0.43). The presence or degree of PVL severity had no influence on survival of patients with high STS score (≥8%), while the presence of greater than mild PVL predicted worse survival in those with STS score <8%. During the first year after PVL diagnosis, while either improvement or stable PVL grade was seen in the majority of patients, worsening of PVL grade was more common in the TAVR group (19%) versus the SAVR group (4%) (p<0.0001).

conclusionsAt mid-term follow-up, the presence of PVL was associated with equally unfavourable outcomes following SAVR or TAVR. In patients with high STS risk score, the presence of PVL was not independently associated with increased mortality.

Indexed as

Prosthesis FailureAgedAged, 80 and overBioprosthesisCohort StudiesCombined Modality TherapyCoronary Artery BypassFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedPostoperative ComplicationsProsthesis DesignRetrospective StudiesSurvival Analysisadult cardiologycardiac surgeryechocardiographyvalvular heart disease

Identifiers

PMID30530577
PMCPMC6303664

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.