ArticleCJC open2025
Review of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Insertion (TAVI) Clinician Opinions on the Canadian Cardiovascular Society Post-TAVI Driving Guidelines.
Article in CJC open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: As compared to surgical aortic valve replacement, transcatheter aortic valve insertion (TAVI) has a lower perioperative risk and an abbreviated recovery. In the absence of robust clinical data to guide decision-making, the Canadian Cardiovascular Society has now recommended the same 1-month driving restriction for both procedures. Methods: In April 2024, a 15-question survey was circulated to all 31 Canadian TAVI centres to explore opinions on the current driving recommendations and the safety of driving post TAVI, with the goal of informing updated expert-informed guidelines. Results: Of 31 TAVI centres, 29 individuals from 25 centres (80.6%) provided responses. The majority (79.3%) expressed that a 1-month driving prohibition was "too long," and 20.7% stated that this restriction was appropriate. When asked to suggest a new post-TAVI driving recommendation for successful, uncomplicated, transfemoral TAVI patients, 41.4% proposed that patients be prohibited from driving for 2 weeks, 24.1% suggested 1 week, 13.8% were supportive of 1 month, and 6.9% were supportive of either 3 weeks, 72 hours, or 48 hours. The predominant driving-related concern was the development of conduction abnormalities (89.7%). A longer driving prohibition (≥ 1 month) was suggested in cases of alternative-access TAVI (transapical: 67.7%; alternative arterial: 51.6%), access-site and/or vascular complications (48.4%), and conduction abnormalities without a pacemaker (45.2%). Conclusions: The majority of Canadian TAVI programs expressed that a 1-month driving restriction period was overly cautious and that shorter restriction periods would be more appropriate. Ultimately, before any change to post-TAVI driving restrictions may be considered, a clinical assessment of patient recovery post TAVI is needed.
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.