ReviewAmerican journal of cardiovascular disease2024
Cardiovascular outcomes of emergent vs elective transcatheter aortic valve replacement in severe aortic stenosis: regression matched meta-analysis.
Review in American journal of cardiovascular disease, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- A history that matters: a systematic review and meta-analysis on prior heart failure hospitalization and outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation.Journal of echocardiography · 2026Review
- Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Cardiogenic Shock: Current Evidence, Clinical Challenges, and Future Directions.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTranscatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has been highly increased as the recommended option for patients with a high surgical risk. This study aims to commit a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the outcomes in severe aortic stenosis patients following emergency transcatheter aortic valve replacement (emergent TAVR) compared to elective TAVR or eBAV followed by elective TAVR.
methodsWe conducted a systematic literature search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, CINAHL, Science Direct, and Google Scholar. We included nine studies in the latest analysis that reported the desired outcomes. Outcomes were classified into primary outcomes: 30-day all-cause mortality and 30-day readmission rate, and secondary outcomes, which were further divided into (a) peri-procedural outcomes, (b) vascular outcomes, and (c) renal outcomes. Statistical analysis was performed using Stata v.17 (College State, TX) software.
resultsA total of 44,731 patients with severe aortic stenosis were included (emergent TAVR n = 4502; control n = 40045). 30-day mortality was significantly higher in the emergent TAVR group (OR: 2.62; 95% CI = 1.76-3.92; P < 0.01). Regarding post-procedural outcomes, the length of stay was significantly higher in the emergent TAVR group (Hedges's g: +4.73 days; 95% CI = +3.35 to +6.11; P < 0.01). With respect to vascular outcomes, they were similar in both groups. Regarding renal outcomes, both acute kidney injury (OR: 2.52; 95% CI = 1.59-4.00; P < 0.01) and use of renal replacement therapy (OR: 2.33; 95% CI = 1.87-2.91; P < 0.01) were significantly higher in emergent TAVR group as compared to the control group.
conclusionOur study demonstrated that despite increased 30-day mortality and worse renal outcomes, the post-procedural outcomes were similar in emergent and elective TAVR groups. The increased mortality and worse renal outcomes are likely due to hemodynamic instability in the emergent group. The similarity of post-procedural outcomes is evidence of the safety of TAVR even in emergent settings.
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.