ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2026
The association of cerebral embolic protection during transcatheter aortic valve replacement with periprocedural neurological outcomes.
Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Cerebral Embolic Protection Devices (CEPs) have been designed to minimize the risk of periprocedural stroke. The clinical significance of these devices, however, is still under debate. We aimed to compare periprocedural neurological outcomes and mortality in patients undergoing transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TF-TAVR) with vs. without CEP. Methods: A single-center retrospective analysis of 1,101 patients undergoing transfemoral TAVR from August 2017 to May 2025 was performed. CEPs were used routinely at our institution whenever anatomically feasible beginning with October 2019. The primary outcome was defined as the incidence of ischemic stroke occurring within 3 days postoperatively. Secondary endpoints included transient ischemic attack (TIA) and delirium within 3 days and short-term all-cause mortality. Results: Overall, 809 underwent TF-TAVR with CEP, while 292 were treated without. The primary endpoint of clinical ischemic stroke occurred less frequently in the CEP group (1.4% vs. 4.1%), and the group difference revealed a significant result in a univariable Cox regression analysis ( Conclusion: The use of neuroprotection during TAVR was associated with a lower observed hazard of early periprocedural ischemic stroke in this unadjusted retrospective cohort.
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.