SynthesisCardiovascular intervention and therapeutics2022
Safety and efficacy of cerebral embolic protection devices in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a meta-analysis of in-hospital outcomes.
Synthesis in Cardiovascular intervention and therapeutics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cerebral embolic protection during transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis of propensity score matched and randomized controlled trials using the Sentinel cerebral embolic protection device.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2023Pooled it
- Cerebral Embolic Protection Devices: Current State of the Art.US cardiology · 2023Review
- Antithrombotic Therapy Following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Embolic Protection with the TriGuard 3 System in Nonagenarian Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement for Severe Aortic Stenosis.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
7 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The evidence regarding the impact of cerebral embolic protection devices (EPDs) on outcomes following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is limited. The objective of this study was to evaluate in-hospital outcomes with the use of cerebral EPDs in TAVR. We performed a comprehensive EMBASE and PUBMED search to investigate randomized control studies or propensity score-matched retrospective studies which assessed patients undergoing TAVR with or without EPD up to April 2021. Endpoints of interest were in-hospital mortality, stroke, acute kidney injury, pacemaker implantation, major bleeding, vascular complication, length of stay. Ten studies involving 173,002 patients with EPD (n = 16,898, 9.8%) and those without (n = 156,104, 90.2%) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The use of EPD was associated with significantly lower risk of in-hospital stroke (odds ratio [95% confidential interval]: 0.64 [0.46; 0.89]), but similar rate of in-hospital mortality (odds ratio [95% confidential interval]: 0.75 [0.54; 1.05]). No differences were observed in acute kidney injury, pacemaker implantation, major bleeding, vascular complication, length of stay. EPD during TAVR was associated with lower in-hospital stroke but did not affect procedural complications and length of stay.
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.