ArticleScientific reports2025
Evaluation of aortic arch calcification to predict prognosis after transcatheter aortic valve replacement.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mitral Annular and Aortic Calcification in Aortic Stenosis: Risk Marker or Bystander?Korean circulation journal · 2026Article
- Prognostic Impact of Mitral Annular Calcification and Aortic Arch Calcification in Severe Aortic Stenosis Patients Undergoing Aortic Valve Replacement.Korean circulation journal · 2026Article
- Stroke in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (TAVI): A Comprehensive Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Vascular clues in joint degeneration: a cross-sectional study on the association between aortic knob width, aortic arch calcification, and the severity of hand and knee osteoarthritis.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Article
- Association Between AI-derived Thoracic Calcium Volume and Aortic Valve Calcification Quantified by Agatston Scoring.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Few centers routinely report aortic arch calcification (AAC) due to the lack of an easy and effective evaluation method. The association between AAC and the clinical prognosis of patients who undergo transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is unclear. We aimed to develop a rapid method to evaluate AAC in patients who underwent TAVR and to further assess their prognosis. We enrolled 464 consecutive patients with aortic stenosis who underwent TAVR. Patients with severe (11.2%), moderate (18.5%), mild (58.2%), and no (12.1%) AAC had an estimated 3-year all-cause mortality incidence of 39.6%, 20.8%, 13.4%, and 6.7% (log rank p < 0.001), respectively. Patients with severe AAC had a significantly higher incidence of both cardiovascular (log rank p = 0.002) and non-cardiovascular mortality (log rank p = 0.009), whereas patients with moderate AAC had a higher incidence of only non-cardiovascular mortality (p = 0.003) compared with patients with no/mild AAC. Moderate/severe AAC was an independent predictor of 3-year all-cause mortality in univariate (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.39, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.41-4.03; p = 0.001) and multivariate COX regression analyses (HR: 1.78, 95%CI: 1.04-3.06; p = 0.037). Our rapid semi-quantitative method to evaluate AAC is highly reproducible and can be used to assess AAC in patients who undergo TAVR.
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.