ArticleOpen heart2025
Residual SYNTAX score and outcomes after TAVR+PCI versus SAVR+CABG: a propensity-matched, gender-based comparison.
Article in Open heart, 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAortic stenosis (AS) and coronary artery disease (CAD) frequently coexist, requiring careful revascularisation strategy consideration. While surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) plus coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is traditional, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) plus percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is increasingly used. The optimal strategy, particularly regarding residual CAD burden, remains unclear.
objectivesThis study investigated the impact of residual SYNTAX (Synergy between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention with Taxus and Cardiac Surgery) score (rSS) on outcomes in men and women with AS and CAD undergoing TAVR+PCI versus SAVR+CABG.
methodsIn this retrospective study, propensity score-matched cohorts of men and women undergoing either procedure were analysed. Matching variables included age, left ventricular ejection fraction, EuroSCORE II (European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation II) and CAD severity.
results398 patients (114 women and 284 men) were included. The rSS was predictive of the primary composite endpoint in the TAVR+PCI group (p=0.006 women and p<0.001 men) but not in the SAVR+CABG group. In patients achieving an rSS<8, TAVR+PCI was associated with a lower combined endpoint rate compared with SAVR+CABG, consistent across genders (p=0.02). Furthermore, TAVR+PCI demonstrated significant safety benefits, including lower rates of major bleeding in men (2.1% vs 10.6%) and stroke in women (1.8% vs 12.3%).
conclusionsThe prognostic importance of the rSS is strategy-dependent. For patients undergoing TAVR+PCI, achieving extensive revascularisation (rSS <8) is a critical procedural goal associated with improved outcomes. For patients undergoing SAVR+CABG, prognosis appears driven more by baseline clinical risk.
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.