ArticleInternational journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature2022
Impact of arm circumference on clinical outcomes in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement.
Article in International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature, 2022. 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.
- Recent highlights from theInternational journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Although Arm circumference (AC) is considered to be a predictor of clinical outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), limited data are available on the impact of this anthropometric measurement. This study aimed to investigate the clinical impact of AC on the outcomes of patients who underwent TAVR. Methods: AC was investigated in consecutive patients who underwent TAVR between March 2014 and May 2018. Patients were divided into low AC (n = 220) and high AC (n = 127) groups by a classification and regression tree (CART) survival model, and their baseline characteristics and mortality were compared. The correlations of AC with other frailty markers were also evaluated. Results: One-year clinical follow-up was completed in 100% of cases, and 89 patients (31 men, 58 women) died during the median follow-up period of 825 days. The low AC group was more fragile than the high AC group, and the AC value was significantly correlated with each frailty marker (all p < 0.05). The Cox regression analysis demonstrated the independent association of mortality with low AC (HR: 2.56, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.47-4.46, p < 0.001). When AC was compared to conventional prediction models of survival, the net reclassification improvement and the integrated discrimination improvement analysis showed significant improvements in predicting outcomes after including the AC with other frailty markers (all p < 0.05). Conclusions: The AC is related to frailty markers and is an important surrogate marker for predicting worse clinical outcomes after TAVR. Assessment of AC may be considered when deciding on TAVR.
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.