ReviewEuropean heart journal. Imaging methods and practice2024
How to address the coronaries in TAVI candidates: can the need for revascularization be safely determined by CT angiography only?
Review in European heart journal. Imaging methods and practice, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Computed Tomography Coronary Angiography as a Gatekeeper for Invasive Coronary Assessment Before Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Review
- Coronary artery disease in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement: Current evidence and future directions.American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice · 2026Review
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
Coronary artery disease (CAD) remains one of the most frequent comorbidities among transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) candidates. Whether routine assessment of CAD by invasive coronary angiography (CA) and eventual peri-procedural percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is generally beneficial in TAVI patients has recently been heavily questioned. CA carries significant risks, such as kidney injury, bleeding, and prolonged hospital stay, and may frequently be unnecessary if significant stenoses of the proximal coronary segments can be ruled out on computed tomography angiography. Moreover, the benefits of pre-emptive coronary revascularization at the time of TAVI are not well defined. Despite these facts and weak guideline recommendations, CA and eventual PCI of stable significant coronary lesions at the time of TAVI remain common practice. However, ongoing randomized trials currently challenge the efficacy of such strategies to enable a more streamlined, individualized, and resource-sparing treatment with TAVI.
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.