Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31718443›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Heart Association2019

Differences in Inpatient Outcomes After Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement at Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement (TAVR) and Non-TAVR Centers.

Godly Jack, Sameer Arora, Paula D Strassle, Kranthi Sitammagari, Kishorbhai Gangani, Michael Yeung, Matthew A Cavender, Patrick T O'Gara, John P Vavalle

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Godly JackDepartment of Internal Medicine University of North Carolina School of Medicine Chapel Hill NC.
Sameer AroraCenter for Research and Population Health Lillington NC.
Paula D StrassleDepartment of Epidemiology Gillings School of Global Public Health University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill NC.
Kranthi SitammagariCampbell University School of Osteopathic Medicine Lillington NC.
Kishorbhai GanganiDepartment of Internal Medicine Texas Health Arlington Memorial Hospital Arlington TX.
Michael YeungDivision of Cardiology University of North Carolina School of Medicine Chapel Hill NC.
Matthew A CavenderDivision of Cardiology University of North Carolina School of Medicine Chapel Hill NC.
Patrick T O'GaraDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine Brigham and Women's Hospital Harvard Medical School Boston MA.
John P VavalleDivision of Cardiology University of North Carolina School of Medicine Chapel Hill NC.
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · USCampbell University · USHarvard University · USTexas Health Arlington Memorial · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has solidified the importance of a heart team and revolutionized patient selection for surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). It is unknown if hospital ability to offer TAVR impacts SAVR outcomes. We investigated outcomes after SAVR between TAVR and non-TAVR centers. Methods and Results Hospitalizations of patients aged ≥50 years, undergoing elective SAVR between January 2012 and September 2015, in the National Readmission Database (NRD) were included. Multivariable logistic, linear, and generalized logistic regression models were used to adjust for patient and hospital characteristics and estimate association between undergoing SAVR at a TAVR center, compared with a non-TAVR center. The association between TAVR volumes and these outcomes were also assessed. SAVR hospitalizations (n = 32 198) were identified; 22 066 (69%) at TAVR and 10 132 (31%) at non-TAVR centers. SAVRs at TAVR centers had lower odds of inpatient mortality (odds ratio 0.67, 95% CI 0.55-0.82) and discharge to skilled nursing facility (odds ratio 0.92, 95% CI 0.85-0.99), compared with non-TAVR centers. There was no difference in LOS (change in estimate -0.09, 95% CI -0.26 to 0.08) or 30-day re-admission (odds ratio 0.95, 95% CI 0.88-1.03). SAVRs performed at the highest TAVR volume centers had the lowest inpatient mortality, compared with non-TAVR centers (odds ratio 0.43 95% CI 0.29-0.63). Conclusions Patients undergoing SAVR at TAVR centers are more likely to survive and have better discharge disposition than patients undergoing SAVR at non-TAVR centers. Whether this represents benefits of a heart-team approach to care or differences in patient selection for SAVR when TAVR is unavailable requires further study.

Indexed as

Heart Valve Prosthesis ImplantationHospital MortalityAgedAortic Valve StenosisFemaleHospitalsHospitals, High-VolumeHospitals, Low-VolumeHumansLength of StayLinear ModelsLogistic ModelsMaleMiddle AgedPatient ReadmissionPatient Transferaortic valve replacementaortic valve stenosistranscatheter aortic valve implantation

Identifiers

PMID31718443
PMCPMC6915265
OpenAlexW2988042441

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.