Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35236643›Full record

ArticleEuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology2022

Coronary access after transcatheter aortic valve replacement in bicuspid versus tricuspid aortic stenosis.

Fei Chen, Kaiyu Jia, Yijian Li, Tianyuan Xiong, Xi Wang, Zhongkai Zhu, Yuanweixiang Ou, Xi Li, Xin Wei, Zhengang Zhao and 6 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 36% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. 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

16 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Fei ChenDepartment of Cardiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Kaiyu JiaWest China School of Medicine, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Yijian LiDepartment of Cardiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Tianyuan XiongDepartment of Cardiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Xi WangDepartment of Cardiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Zhongkai ZhuDepartment of Cardiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Yuanweixiang OuDepartment of Cardiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Xi LiDepartment of Cardiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Xin WeiDepartment of Cardiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Zhengang ZhaoDepartment of Cardiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Qiao LiDepartment of Cardiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Sen HeDepartment of Cardiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Jiafu WeiDepartment of Cardiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Yong PengDepartment of Cardiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Yuan FengDepartment of Cardiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Mao ChenDepartment of Cardiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Sichuan University · CNWest China Hospital of Sichuan University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIt is unknown whether there are differences in coronary access after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) between bicuspid and tricuspid anatomy.

aimsOur aim was to investigate coronary access after TAVR using a self-expanding transcatheter heart valve (THV) in bicuspid versus tricuspid aortic valves (BAV vs TAV), based on CT simulation.

methodsA total of 86 type 0 BAV, 70 type 1 BAV, and 132 TAV patients were included. If the coronary ostium faced the sealed parts of the THV or the tilted-up native leaflet (NL), this was defined as THV- or NL-related challenging coronary access, respectively. If coaxial engagement was not allowed due to interference from the unwrapped frame, THV-related complex coronary access was defined.

resultsThe incidence of THV-related challenging coronary access was 21.2% for the left coronary artery (LCA) and 17.7% for the right coronary artery (RCA), and type 0 BAV patients encountered fewer THV-related challenging LCA access than their TAV counterparts (OR 0.42, 95% CI: 0.20-0.89). NL-related challenging coronary access was observed in 3.1% for LCA and 1.4% for RCA, and THV-related complex coronary access was identified in 5.9% for LCA and 17.0% for RCA; however, no significant differences were found among groups. The proportion of optimal fluoroscopic viewing angles suitable for guiding LCA engagement was similar among groups (64.0% vs 70.0% vs 62.1%), but those suitable for guiding RCA engagement were significantly higher in the type 0 BAV group (31.4% vs 4.3% vs 9.1%).

conclusionsCoronary access may be challenging or complex in a significant proportion of both BAV and TAV patients after TAVR. Type 0 BAV anatomy may be more favourable for post-TAVR coronary access.

Indexed as

Aortic Valve StenosisBicuspid Aortic Valve DiseaseHeart Valve DiseasesTranscatheter Aortic Valve ReplacementAortic ValveHumansTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID35236643
PMCPMC9912966
OpenAlexW4220732844

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.