ArticleCardiology and therapy2025
Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients with Polyvascular Disease.
Article in Cardiology and therapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThere is a paucity of data regarding the trends and comparative outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) versus surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) among patients with polyvascular disease (PVD).
methodsThe Nationwide Readmissions Database (2016-2020) was queried for patients undergoing AVR. Propensity score matching was used to compare the outcomes of TAVR versus SAVR among patients with PVD, and for comparing TAVR among those with versus without PVD. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality.
resultsThe final cohort included 545,409 hospitalizations for AVR. During the study years, there was an increase in the utilization of TAVR versus SAVR among patients with PVD. Patients with PVD undergoing TAVR were older and more likely to be women compared with patients with PVD undergoing SAVR. Compared with SAVR, patients with PVD undergoing TAVR had lower odds of in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.26; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.19-0.35), acute myocardial infarction (AMI), ischemic stroke, hemorrhagic stroke, and major bleeding, but higher odds of pacemaker and non-elective 90-day readmissions (aOR 1.13; 95% CI 1.01-1.26). TAVR among patients with versus without PVD showed similar in-hospital mortality (aOR 1.10; 95% CI 0.94-1.20), while there were higher odds of AMI, ischemic stroke, and vascular complications after TAVR in patients with PVD. A higher burden of atherosclerotic vascular beds conferred higher mortality with SAVR more than with TAVR, while a higher burden of atherosclerotic vascular beds conferred a higher risk of ischemic stroke and readmissions after both TAVR and SAVR.
conclusionsNationwide data demonstrated that patients with PVD who undergo TAVR were associated with lower in-hospital mortality and major cardiovascular complications compared with those who undergo SAVR. Patients with PVD have similar mortality to those with no PVD undergoing TAVR, but were associated with a higher risk for complications and readmission.
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.