Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33924077›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2021

Neurocognitive Status after Aortic Valve Replacement: Differences between TAVI and Surgery.

Nicholas Aroney, Tiffany Patterson, Christopher Allen, Simon Redwood, Bernard Prendergast

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. [Advances in stroke after transcatheter aortic valve replacement].Zhejiang da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Zhejiang University. Medical sciences · 2025
    Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Nicholas AroneyCardiovascular Directorate, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London SE1 7EH, UK.
Tiffany PattersonCardiovascular Directorate, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London SE1 7EH, UK.
Christopher AllenCardiovascular Directorate, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London SE1 7EH, UK.
Simon RedwoodCardiovascular Directorate, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London SE1 7EH, UK.
Bernard PrendergastCardiovascular Directorate, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London SE1 7EH, UK.
Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

British Heart Foundation FS/18/48/33745
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Over the past decade, indications for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) have progressed rapidly-procedural numbers now exceed those of surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in many countries, and TAVI is now a realistic and attractive alternative to SAVR in low-risk patients. Neurocognitive outcomes after TAVI and SAVR remain an issue and sit firmly under the spotlight as TAVI moves into low-risk cohorts. Cognitive decline and stroke carry a significant burden and predict future functional decline, reduced mobility, poor quality of life and increased mortality. Early TAVI trials used varying neurocognitive definitions, and outcomes differed significantly as a result. Recent international consensus statements defining endpoints following TAVI and SAVR have standardised neurological outcomes and facilitate interpretation and comparison between trials. The latest TAVI and SAVR trials have demonstrated more consistent and favourable neurocognitive outcomes for TAVI patients, and cerebral embolic protection devices offer the prospect of further refinement and improvement.

Indexed as

neurocognitiveSAVRstrokesurgeryTAVI

Identifiers

PMID33924077
PMCPMC8074293
OpenAlexW3156688546

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.