ReviewEuropean heart journal. Digital health2026
Understanding the mechanisms of TAVI durability through computational modelling: a multidisciplinary review.
Review in European heart journal. Digital health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Feasibility of large-scale in silico transcatheter aortic valve implantation trials using a fast-to-evaluate model.Biomechanics and modeling in mechanobiology · 2026Article
- Contemporary Management of Aortic Stenosis: Timing of Intervention and Lifetime Valve Management.European journal of clinical investigation · 2026Review
- Computational modelling for personalized transcatheter aortic valve replacement planning: a systematic review of complications and decision support.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) expands to younger populations, durability has become a concern, requiring a lifetime rather than a single-procedure perspective. While clinical trials suggest comparable mid-term performance to surgical bioprostheses, data beyond 10 years remain limited, particularly for bicuspid valves, valve-in-valve procedures, and complex anatomies. Computational modelling combines patient anatomy and device design in computer-based simulations to study valve performance under physiological loading. Applied to TAVI, these models can reproduce implantation, evaluate mechanical stresses, and simulate blood flow, providing mechanistic insights into deterioration processes, including altered leaflet loading, stent deformation, and thrombosis-prone flow. Although these simulations do not directly assess durability, they use surrogate metrics linked with these mechanisms, helping identify factors that may influence longevity and guide design and procedural refinements. Clinically, modelling could support patient-specific planning and reintervention strategies, informing decisions across the valve-replacement pathway, an important consideration as younger patients are likely to undergo multiple lifetime procedures. Integrating these tools into pre-procedural planning may help anticipate challenges such as coronary access, annular geometry, and redo feasibility. However, current studies report elements of verification and field-level validation, but none complete a pre-specified, calibrated surrogate-to-outcome validation with uncertainty/sensitivity analysis; thus, durability predictions remain exploratory. Progress needs transparent verification, field checks vs. bench or imaging, surrogate calibration to data, outcome testing in independent cohorts, and routine uncertainty/sensitivity reporting, with close clinician-engineer collaboration. This review underscores the need for a multidisciplinary approach and provides a critical analysis of the available tools and their potential to advance 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.