ArticleClinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society2026
Barthel index in TAVR patients - a novel use of an old score.
Article in Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society, 2026. 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTranscatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has become a well-established therapy for aortic stenosis (AS). With rising TAVR numbers, appropriate patient selection becomes more important. Identifying patients with the highest long-term benefit from the procedure is especially challenging in this elderly patient cohort. Barthel Index (BI) is a commonly used tool to assess the patients' capability of activities of daily life. METHODS AND
resultsIn this single-center study, we analyzed BI of patients receiving TAVR for severe symptomatic AS at our center in 2018 and 2019. BI had been collected by nursing personnel during clinical routine and 475 patients could be analyzed. Median BI was 90 points and was used as cut-off to define two groups of patients: lesser frail patients with higher BI (≥ 90; n = 255) and more frail patients with lower BI (< 90; n = 220). Patients with lower BI were older (83 vs. 80 years; p < 0.01) with higher surgical risk score (STS-score 4.1% vs. 2.5%; p < 0.01), and worse renal function (CKD in 49.5% vs. 31.8%; p < 0.01). Long-term survival differed significantly: only 117 patients (53.1%) in the low BI group were still alive 4-years after TAVR vs. 204 patients (80.0%) in the higher BI group. Further analyses revealed that combining STS score and BI significantly improved mortality prediction (C index for STS score 0.626; C index for combined STS score and BI 0.683; p < 0.01).
conclusionsThis is the first analysis evaluating the prognostic value of BI on long-term survival after TAVR. Albeit assessing only the patient's functional status and no detailed medical history, BI is a strong discriminator for frail patients. Moreover, it allows identification of patients at higher risk of mortality within the first 4 years after TAVR and should therefore be considered for evaluation of patients with severe AS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41701344What 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.