ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2022
Evolving Devices and Material in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: What to Use and for Whom.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Innovation and Challenges in Materials for Transcatheter Aortic Valves.Journal of cardiovascular translational research · 2026Review
- TAVI Performance at a Single Center over Several Years: Procedural and Clinical Outcomes.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Anatomical features of aortic root in patients with aortic stenosis treated by TAVR: an observational study.BMC medical imaging · 2025Observational
- The emerging challenge ofClinical microbiology reviews · 2024Review
- A Comprehensive Geriatric Workup and Frailty Assessment in Older Patients with Severe Aortic Stenosis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation for Severe Chronic Aortic Regurgitation.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Modern Treatment of Valvulopathies in Patients with Congenital Hemophilia.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Coronary Obstruction during Valve-in-Valve Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Pre-Procedural Risk Evaluation, Intra-Procedural Monitoring, and Follow-Up.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has revolutionized the treatment of aortic stenosis, providing a viable alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for patients deemed to be at prohibitive surgical risk, but also for selected patients at intermediate or low surgical risk. Nonetheless, there still exist uncertainties regarding the optimal management of patients undergoing TAVR. The selection of the optimal bioprosthetic valve for each patient represents one of the most challenging dilemmas for clinicians, given the large number of currently available devices. Limited follow-up data from landmark clinical trials comparing TAVR with SAVR, coupled with the typically elderly and frail population of patients undergoing TAVR, has led to inconclusive data on valve durability. Recommendations about the use of one device over another in given each patient's clinical and procedural characteristics are largely based on expert consensus. This review aims to evaluate the available evidence on the performance of different devices in the presence of specific clinical and anatomic features, with a focus on patient, procedural, and device features that have demonstrated a relevant impact on the risk of poor hemodynamic valve performance and adverse clinical events.
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.