ArticleCardiovascular diagnosis and therapy2025
Comparison of TAVR and SAVR in elderly patients with pure native aortic regurgitation: outcomes and midterm results.
Article in Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy, 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.
- Comparing TA-TAVR and SAVR in severe aortic regurgitation: outcomes and valve haemodynamics.Open heart · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Aortic regurgitation (AR) is a common valvular disease, but data comparing surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) and transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) for pure native AR are limited. The aim of this study is to provide more robust evidence for employing TAVR in patients with pure native AR. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included 208 elderly patients (≥65 years) with pure native AR who underwent elective aortic valve replacement (SAVR or TAVR, all patients underwent TAVR procedure using the J-Valve™ system) between January 2018 and June 2023 at Beijing Anzhen Hospital, China. Safety and hemodynamic outcomes were assessed up to 3.1 years [interquartile range (IQR), 1.9-4.8 years], with propensity score weighting used to adjust for confounders. Results: The median ages were 74.0 in the TAVR group and 68.0 in the SAVR group. SAVR patients were younger and had fewer comorbidities. The all-cause mortality in the TAVR group during the in-hospital period was significantly higher than the SAVR group after adjustment (15.8% Conclusions: TAVR patients with pure native AR were older, had more comorbidities, and had higher Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality (STS-PROM) scores than SAVR patients. Cardiac mortality was similar between groups during hospitalization and follow-up. TAVR is a safe and effective treatment for elderly patients with pure native AR, providing superior hemodynamic performance and the potential for improved long-term outcomes.
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.