One-Year Outcomes of a Randomized Trial Comparing a Self-Expanding With a Balloon-Expandable Transcatheter Aortic Valve
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
COPE I (Safety and Efficacy of the Symetis ACURATE neo/TF Compared to the Edwards SAPIEN 3 Bioprosthesis) is an investigator-initiated randomized clinical trial comparing the self-expanding Acurate neo (NEO) with the balloonexpandable Sapien 3 (S3) bioprosthesis in patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis undergoing transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).At 30 days, TAVR with NEO did not meet noninferiority compared with S3 regarding the primary composite end point because of higher rates of prosthetic valve regurgitation (PVR) and acute kidney injury. 1 Here we report outcomes at 1 year.Patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis deemed at increased surgical risk were recruited at 20 tertiary centers across Europe.Clinical endpoints were adjudicated by an independent clinical events committee blinded to treatment allocation.Outcome rates at 1 year are reported as Kaplan-Meier estimates and compared by means of Cox proportional hazard models in the intention-to-treat cohort.Valve performance at follow-up was assessed by an independent echocardiography core laboratory and is reported for the valve implant cohort.Details concerning administrative structure, study design, and end point definitions have been reported. 1Study approval was obtained from institutional ethics committees at each site.The study is registered (URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov;Unique identifier: NCT03011346).The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.A total of 739 patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to TAVR with NEO (n=372) or S3 (n=367) between February 2017 and 2019.One-year follow-up was available in 715 (96.8%) patients.Baseline characteristics have been previously reported. 1Major clinical outcome rates and hazard ratios comparing the 2 groups are depicted in the Figure .At 1 year, rates of all-cause death were 10.9% in the NEO and 8.3% in the S3 group (hazard ratio, 1.31 [95% CI, 0.81-2.10]).Disabling stroke occurred in 2.9% (NEO) and 1.7% (S3) at 1 year (hazard ratio, 1.66 [95% CI, 0.60-4.57]),and the composite of all-cause death and disabling stroke in 12.0% and 9.4%, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.27 [95% CI, 0.81-1.98]).At 1 year, the prevalence of moderate or severe PVR remained numerically higher in the NEO group (15/168 [8.9%] versus 6/165 [3.6%]; P=0.07), whereas mean transprosthetic gradients were lower (7.2±3.3 versus 11.5±5.4mm Hg; P<0.001).At 1 year, no differences in clinical outcomes were observed in the randomized comparison of the NEO and S3 in patients undergoing TAVR for symptomatic severe aortic stenosis.The rate of PVR remained higher and transprosthetic mean gradients lower in NEO recipients from 30 days to 1-year follow-up.One-year death rates observed in SCOPE I are in the range of those previously reported for intermediate risk patients using newer generation devices. 2,3The numerically higher rate of all-cause death at 1 year in the NEO group partly results from periprocedural adverse events that occurred more frequently in the NEO group. 1 It may be difficult to ascribe longer-term mortality to specific transcatheter One-Year Outcomes of a Randomized Trial Comparing a Self-Expanding With a Balloon-Expandable Transcatheter Aortic Valve
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,009 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,004 | 0,005 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,004 | 0,005 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,008 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».