ArticleAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2025
Transcatheter vs. surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with aortic stenosis and chronic kidney disease: a comprehensive meta-analysis.
Article in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 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.
- TAVR vs. SAVR in Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis and Chronic Kidney Disease Undergoing Dialysis: A Comprehensive Meta-Analysis.Cardiology research and practice · 2026Article
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
Introduction: Aortic stenosis (AS) is treated with either transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) or Surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). However, limited data exist to study the postoperative clinical outcomes in patients with AS and chronic kidney disease (CKD). The objective of this study is to compare TAVR and SAVR postoperative clinical outcomes in patients with AS and CKD. Methods: According to PRISMA guidelines, a comprehensive search was conducted across various databases such as PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and Google Scholar. Original studies that compared the clinical outcomes between TAVR and SAVR in patients with underlying CKD were included in the study. Results: Twenty-three studies with 69 017 patients with chronic kidney disease who underwent TAVR or SAVR were included in this study. Patients who underwent TAVR had significantly lower odds of in-hospital mortality (OR 0.54; 0.32, 0.91; Conclusion: In patients with AS and CKD, TAVR is associated with significantly lower in-hospital mortality, a reduced incidence of acute kidney injury, and fewer postoperative complications compared to SAVR. However, TAVR carries higher risks of pacemaker implantation and major vascular complications, highlighting the importance of individualized risk assessment and considering TAVR as a favorable alternative to SAVR in appropriately selected CKD patients.
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.