ArticleActa informatica medica : AIM : journal of the Society for Medical Informatics of Bosnia & Herzegovina : casopis Drustva za medicinsku informatiku BiH2025
Access Site and Pacemaker Outcomes After TAVR in HFrEF Patients: Axillary vs Femoral Approach.
Article in Acta informatica medica : AIM : journal of the Society for Medical Informatics of Bosnia & Herzegovina : casopis Drustva za medicinsku informatiku BiH, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Aortic stenosis is a prevalent disease affecting approximately 10% of the population by the eighth decade, it is a fatal disease without treatment, with an annual mortality rate reaching 25%. Valve replacement, either through surgical or transcatheter approach, is the only therapeutic option. Over the last 15 years, the indications for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) have spread to include young and low surgical risk patients. Objective: Our study aims to address this gap in the literature by comparing the adverse outcome after TAVR through axillary versus femoral access in heart failure reduce ejection fraction (HFrEF) patients who underwent TAVR within 30 days of the procedure. Methods: We used data from TriNetX US collaborative network database, including HFrEF patients who had TAVR through axillary or femoral access between 2015 and 2025. Propensity score matching was done to minimize the difference in baseline characteristics between the two cohorts. Outcomes were observed within the first 30 days of TAVR. Results: A total of 206 patients in each cohort (axillary vs. femoral) were studied after propensity score matching. The incidence of permanent pacemaker (PPM) insertion was comparable between groups (5.0% vs. 5.1%; OR: 0.984, 95% CI: 0.400-2.419; HR: 0.365, 95% CI: 0.097-1.376; p = 0.157). Secondary outcomes showed no significant differences between the axillary and femoral approaches, including major vascular complications (OR: 0.542, 95% CI: 0.238-1.231; HR: 0.448, 95% CI: 0.192-1.046), acute kidney injury (OR: 0.922, 95% CI: 0.430-1.976; HR: 0.940, 95% CI: 0.459-1.922), all-cause mortality (OR: 1.010, 95% CI: 0.411-2.482; HR: 1.040, 95% CI: 0.433-2.498), cerebrovascular accident (OR: 0.980, 95% CI: 0.390-2.460; HR: 1.142, 95% CI: 0.384-3.399), and acute coronary syndrome (OR: 0.885, 95% CI: 0.355-2.208; HR: 1.211, 95% CI: 0.271-5.412). Conclusion: Our study finding showed no difference in the permanent pacemaker insertion or secondary outcomes (Major vascular complications, Acute Kidney Injury, Cerebrovascular accident, Acute coronary syndrome, and All-cause mortality) within the first 30 days of TAVR in patients with HFrEF, whether the access axillary or femoral.
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.