ArticlePostepy w kardiologii interwencyjnej = Advances in interventional cardiology2021
Comparison of the results of transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients with bicuspid and tricuspid aortic valve.
Article in Postepy w kardiologii interwencyjnej = Advances in interventional cardiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement for Bicuspid Versus Tricuspid Aortic Stenosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Comparison of outcomes in patients with severe aortic stenosis treated with small and large Medtronic Evolut R and Evolut PRO self-expandable prosthetic valves.Postepy w kardiologii interwencyjnej = Advances in interventional cardiology · 2023Article
- Mid-term outcomes of patients with Lotus and Evolut transcatheter valves.Postepy w kardiologii interwencyjnej = Advances in interventional cardiology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIndications for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) are constantly expanding, including younger patients. Bicuspid aortic valves (BAV) often occur in this group. In order to achieve optimal treatment results in younger patients, it is necessary to develop an effective method for selecting the size of implanted valves.
aimTo compare the results of TAVI with use of a self-expanding prosthesis in patients with a BAV and a tricuspid aortic valve (TAV) with valve selection based on annular sizing. MATERIAL AND
methodsThe diagnosis of BAV and TAV and measurements (annular sizing) were based on multi-slice computed tomography scans. Eighty-three patients received a self-expanding CoreValve or Evolut R prosthesis. In group I (BAV) there were 21 (25.3%) patients and in group II (TAV) there were 62 (74.7%) patients.
resultsThe groups did not differ in terms of baseline clinical characteristics. Device success was achieved in 16 (76.2%) and 55 (88.7%) (
conclusionsTAVI in patients with severe aortic stenosis and BAV is as effective as in patients with TAV using self-expanding prostheses if the valve selection is based on annular sizing.
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.