ArticleStructural heart : the journal of the Heart Team2023
An Updated Meta-Analysis on Cerebral Embolic Protection in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Intervention Stratified by Baseline Surgical Risk and Device Type.
Article in Structural heart : the journal of the Heart Team, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trends in Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement Outcomes in Patients With Low-Surgical Risk: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2024Pooled it
- Outcome of cerebral embolic protection during transcatheter aortic valve replacement in high-risk patient for stroke.JTCVS structural and endovascular · 2026Article
- Expected Surgical Risk and the Risk of Stroke and Brain Injury After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Patient-Level Pooled Analysis.Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2025Article
- Early single center experience with cerebral embolic protection in high-risk cardiac surgery.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Early Outcomes With Cerebral Embolic Protection During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation.Structural heart : the journal of the Heart Team · 2025Article
- Minimally invasive aspiration of thrombi and masses in left-sided cardiac chambers: a comprehensive literature review.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Review
- 2024 Update on Cerebral Embolic Protection After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Outcomes and Predictors of Stroke After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in the Cerebral Protection Device Era.Journal of the American Heart Association · 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
10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Transcatheter aortic valve intervention (TAVI) can lead to the embolization of debris. Capturing the debris by cerebral embolic protection (CEP) devices may reduce the risk of stroke. New evidence has allowed us to examine the effects of CEP in patients undergoing TAVI. We aimed to assess the effects of CEP overall and stratified by the device used (SENTINEL or TriGuard) and the surgical risk of the patients. Methods: We selected randomized controlled trials using electronic databases through September 17, 2022. We estimated random-effects risk ratios (RR) with (95% confidence interval) and calculated absolute risk differences at 30 days across baseline surgical risks derived from the TAVI trials for any stroke (disabling and nondisabling) and all-cause mortality. Results: Among 6 trials (n = 3921), CEP vs. control did not reduce any stroke [RR: 0.95 (0.50-1.81)], disabling [RR: 0.75 (0.18-3.16)] or nondisabling [RR: 0.99 (0.65-1.49)] strokes, or all-cause mortality [RR: 1.23 (0.55-2.77)]. However, when analyzed by device, SENTINEL reduced disabling stroke [RR: 0.46 (0.22-0.95)], translating into 6 fewer per 1000 in high-risk, 3 fewer per 1000 in intermediate-risk, and 1 fewer per 1000 in low surgical-risk patients. CEP vs. control did not reduce the risk of any bleeding [RR: 1.03 (0.44-2.40)], major vascular complications [RR: 1.41 (0.57-3.48)], or acute kidney injury [RR: 1.36 (0.57-3.28)]. Conclusions: This updated meta-analysis showed that SENTINEL CEP might reduce disabling stroke in patients undergoing TAVI. Patients with high and intermediate surgical risks were most likely to derive benefits.
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.