ArticleJournal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions2025
Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients Aged 50 to 64 Years in the United States.
Article in Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients Aged 65 Years and Younger: Unresolved Issues and Future Directions.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Feasibility and Safety of Same-Day Discharge Following Elective Mitral Transcatheter Edge-to-Edge Repair.JACC. Advances · 2026Article
- Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Women of Childbearing Age in the United States.Structural heart : the journal of the Heart Team · 2025Article
- The Age of Opportunity in Aortic Valve Interventions: Beyond Traditional Boundaries for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Younger Patients.Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2025Article
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: Outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) vs surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients aged 50-64 years have not been evaluated in randomized clinical trials. Despite the lack of randomized data, these patients are often treated with TAVR. Methods: We queried the Nationwide Readmissions Database (2016-2021) to identify patients aged 50-64 years hospitalized for isolated aortic valve replacement (AVR). The contemporary use of TAVR and SAVR in patients aged 50-64 years was evaluated. In-hospital outcomes of TAVR vs SAVR were compared using propensity score matching. Readmissions were compared using the Cox proportional hazards regression model. Results: Of 75,413 weighted hospitalizations for isolated AVR in patients aged 50-64 years, 22,695 (30.1%) included TAVR, and 52,718 (69.9%) included SAVR. From 2016Q1 to 2021Q4, the proportion of AVR performed using TAVR increased from 12.6% to 41.4% in patients aged 50-64 years (p Conclusions: This nationwide observational analysis found that TAVR is increasingly performed among patients aged 50-64 years with lower in-hospital mortality and resource utilization but higher readmissions than SAVR.
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.