SynthesisFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2025
Outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement in younger low-risk patients: a comprehensive meta-analysis of efficacy and safety.
Synthesis in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2025. 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.
- Clinical Utility and Limitations of Traditional Risk Scores (EuroSCORE, EuroSCORE II, and STS-PROM) in Patients Undergoing TAVI: A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and aims: Severe aortic stenosis (AS) was traditionally managed with surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) emerged as a less invasive alternative, initially for high-risk patients. This meta-analysis evaluates the outcomes of TAVI in younger, low-risk patients, in whom SAVR is currently the gold standard. Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, we systematically searched randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing TAVI with SAVR in younger (mean age <75 years) low-risk patients (STS score <4%) with severe AS. The primary endpoint was a composite of death or disabling stroke. Secondary endpoints included all-cause mortality, disabling stroke, atrial fibrillation (AF), permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI), bleeding, functional class (NYHA), and quality-of-life (KCCQ score) improvements. Results: Four RCTs were included with 4,252 patients (2,125 TAVI and 2,127 SAVR). At a mean follow-up of 16 ± 5 months, TAVI showed a non-significant reduction in the composite of death or disabling stroke [2.8% vs. 5.1% risk ratio (RR) 0.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.96-1.00), Conclusions: TAVI is a viable option for younger low-risk patients with severe AS, being non-inferior to SAVR in short-term outcomes. The benefits of TAVI include a lower risk of disabling stroke, hospital readmission, and bleeding, as well as quicker improvements in symptoms and quality of life. However, higher PPI rates require careful patient selection. The results support a tailored approach to TAVI in younger patients, with ongoing evaluation of long-term outcomes. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42024559473, PROSPERO (CRD42024559473).
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.