ArticleHerzschrittmachertherapie & Elektrophysiologie2021
[Influence of deep implantation on conduction disturbances after transcatheter aortic valve implantation].
Article in Herzschrittmachertherapie & Elektrophysiologie, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Two-Step Risk Score for Prediction of Permanent Pacemaker Implantation After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundConduction disturbances are common complications of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). One influencing factor is implantation depth (ID) of the TAVI prosthesis. Since this should be standardized, a differentiated consideration of ID is necessary.
objectiveExamination of the impact of ID at different anatomical regions of the left ventricular outflow tract on new conduction disturbances, new permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) and survival. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe retrospective cohort study included 420 patients who underwent transfemoral TAVI with new-generation devices, including 352 patients without pre-existing pacemakers, for analyses on new pacemaker implantation. Of them, 46 patients underwent PPI. ID at non- (NCC) and left-coronary cusp (LCC) were measured using fluoroscopy after valve implantation. Deep ID was defined as the 4th quartile of each prosthesis' ID. Survival was determined from the two-year follow-up. RESULTS AND
conclusionsDeep ID was associated with higher PPI rate only at NCC (p = 0.013). At LCC deep ID resulted in more frequent permanent left bundle branch block (p = 0.014). DI, preexisting pacemaker or new PPI did not affect 2‑year survival. No patients with new PPI suffered moderate to severe paravalvular leak. ID at NCC could be a predictor for PPI after TAVI. A detailed consideration of ID in intervention planning might predict outcome after TAVI and common complications. PPI after TAVI and deep ID at NCC and LCC can be considered safe regarding survival in absence of moderate-to-severe paravalvular leak.
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.