ArticleOpen heart2024
Sex-specific aspects on prognosis after aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis: a SWEDEHEART registry study.
Article in Open heart, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Sex-Related Outcome After Sutureless Aortic Valve Replacement With Perceval Plus: Results From a Global Registry and Meta-Regression.Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Review
- Sex-Related Differences in the Management and Outcomes of Patients Across the Spectrum of Aortic Stenosis.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2026Article
- Sex-Based Differences in Outcomes of Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement: A Meta-Analysis with Reconstructed Time-to-Event Data.CJC open · 2026Review
- Sex Differences in Stroke Frequency and Severity Following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare long-term cardiovascular (CV) outcomes between men and women with aortic stenosis (AS) undergoing aortic valve replacement (AVR) by the type of valve implant.
methodsThe study population consisted of 14 123 non-selected patients with AS undergoing first-time AVR and included in the Swedish Web system for Enhancement and Development of Evidence-based care in Heart disease Evaluated According to Recommended Therapies (SWEDEHEART) registry during 2008-2016. Comparisons were made between men and women and type of valve implant (ie, surgical implantation with a mechanical (mSAVR) (n=1 966) or biological valve (bioSAVR) (n=9 801)) or by a transcatheter approach (TAVR) (n=2 356). Outcomes included all-cause mortality, ischaemic stroke, major bleeding, thromboembolic events, heart failure and myocardial infarction, continuously adjusted for significant comorbidities and medical treatment.
resultsIn the mSAVR cohort, there were no significant sex differences in any CV events. In the bioSAVR cohort, a higher risk of death (HR: 1.14; 95% CI: 1.04 to 1.26, p=0.007) and major bleeding (HR: 1.41; 95% CI: 1.18 to 1.69, p<0.001) was observed in men. In the TAVR cohort, men suffered a higher risk of death (HR: 1.24; 95% CI: 1.07 to 1.45, p=0.005), major bleeding (HR: 1.35; 95% CI: 1.00 to 1.82, p=0.022) and thromboembolism (HR: 1.35, 95% CI: 1.00 to 1.82, p=0.047).
conclusionNo significant long-term difference in CV events was noted between men and women undergoing AVR with a mechanical aortic valve. In both the bioSAVR and TAVR cohort, mortality was higher in men who also had an increased incidence of several other CV 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.