ArticlePloS one2019
Transcatheter aortic valve implantation versus conservative management for severe aortic stenosis in real clinical practice.
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Surgical vs Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement for Asymptomatic Severe Aortic Stenosis- an Updated Meta-Analysis of Reconstructed Individual Patient Data.Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Multidisciplinary team-guided management of severe aortic stenosis: 5-year outcomes following TAVI versus conservative treatment.Open heart · 2026Article
- Pacemaker implantation after surgical aortic valve replacement and balloon-expandable transcatheter aortic valve implantation: Incidence, predictors, and prognosis.Heart rhythm O2 · 2025Article
- Review
- Coronary Revascularization after Transcatheter and Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Asia: Present Status and Future Perspectives.JACC. Asia · 2021Review
- European heart health survey 2019.Clinical cardiology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
54 authors at 20 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTranscatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is criticized by some as an expensive treatment in super-elder patients with limited life expectancy. However, there is a knowledge gap regarding the magnitude of clinical benefit provided by TAVI in comparison with conservative management in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) in real clinical practice, which would be important in the decision making for TAVI.
methodsWe combined two independent registries, namely CURRENT AS and K-TAVI registries. CURRENT AS was a multicenter registry enrolling 3815 consecutive patients with severe AS irrespective to treatment modalities between January 2003 and December 2011. K-TAVI was a multicenter, prospective registry including 449 consecutive patients with severe AS, who underwent TAVI with SAPIEN XT balloon-expandable valves between October 2013 and June 2016. In these 2 registries, 449 patients received TAVI and 894 patients were managed with conservative strategy. We conducted propensity score matching and finally obtained a cohort of 556 patients (278 patients for each group) for the analysis. The primary outcome measures were all-cause death and heart failure (HF) hospitalization at 2-year.
resultsThe cumulative 2-year incidences of all-cause death and HF hospitalization were significantly lower in the TAVI group than in the conservative group (16.8% versus 36.6%, P<0.001, and 10.7% versus 37.2%, P<0.001). After adjusting the residual confounders, TAVI reduced the risks of all-cause death (HR, 0.46; 95%CI, 0.32-0.69; P = 0.0001) and HF hospitalizations (HR, 0.25; 95%CI, 0.16-0.40; P<0.0001) compared with conservative strategy. There was no difference in the cumulative incidence of non-cardiovascular death between the 2 groups.
conclusionsTAVI in the early Japanese experience was associated with striking risk reduction for all-cause death as well as HF hospitalization as compared with the historical cohort of patients with severe AS who were managed conservatively just before introduction of TAVI in Japan.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.