Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42466830›Full record

ReviewInternal medicine journal2026

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation: contemporary management from first valve choice to reintervention.

Malanka Lankaputhra, Nay Min Htun, Dion Stub

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Internal medicine journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Malanka LankaputhraSchool of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Nay Min HtunDepartment of Cardiology, The Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Dion StubSchool of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has evolved from a last resort for inoperable aortic stenosis into the preferred bioprosthetic strategy across much of the surgical-risk spectrum for anatomically suitable patients. As it expands into younger and lower-risk populations, the central question is no longer whether TAVI can be performed, but how to choose the first valve intervention so that future options remain open. This clinical perspective focuses on practical decision-making: which patients are better served by TAVI or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR), how computed tomography planning influences both immediate and lifetime outcomes, how to manage common early issues such as conduction disease and coronary access, and how to recognise valve dysfunction and plan reintervention. Rather than treating the choice between TAVI and SAVR as a single episode, we consider it as the first step in a treatment sequence. After implantation, ongoing outcomes are shaped by rhythm surveillance, optimisation of antithrombotic and heart failure therapy and early detection of leaflet thrombosis, endocarditis or structural valve degeneration. Contemporary aortic valve replacement practice therefore requires choosing the first procedure with the likely next procedure already in mind.

Indexed as

Aortic ValveAortic Valve StenosisDisease ManagementTranscatheter Aortic Valve ReplacementHeart Valve ProsthesisHumansReoperationaortic stenosiscomputed tomographyredo‐transcatheter aortic valve implantationtranscatheter aortic valve implantationvalve‐in‐valve

Identifiers

PMID42466830
PMCPMC13547909

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.