Bibliographic record
Abstract
Following the introduction of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), it is now possible to treat elderly patients with severe aortic stenosis and a high surgical risk. This advancement in interventional cardiology has led to increased survival, health status and quality of life. However, as with many invasive interventional procedures, TAVI is associated with the risk of cerebral embolisation and consequent ischaemic cerebrovascular events with possible neurological impairment. The risk estimates of post-procedural stroke associated with TAVI vary from 1.5 to 10 % and have been reported both early and late after the procedure. In the PARTNER Cohort B study, the Canadian multicentre TAVI registry and the study by Nuis et al., about 50 % of the stroke events occurred more than 24 h post-procedure [1]. In addition to clinically overt stroke, asymptomatic silent cerebral infarcts have been frequently observed on MRI, with a prevalence ranging from 62 to 93 % [2]. Although asymptomatic, accumulating evidence implicates that these silent cerebral infarcts are related to risk of future stroke, cognitive decline, dementia, and depression. Whether stroke occurs due to incomplete endothelialisation of the valve or by new onset of silent atrial fibrillation is unknown. Early post-procedural stroke (<24 h) is more likely the result of embolisation during valve implantation. Given this high incidence of cerebral events, adequate anticoagulation is probably required both during the procedure and in the following months. However, the exact regimen of anticoagulation involves a clinical dilemma with the therapeutic potential of reducing ischaemic complications at the expense of increasing the bleeding risk. The overall incidence of bleeding following TAVI has been reported in 41 % of the patients in the meta-analysis conducted by Genereux et al., of which 16 % were life-threatening [3]. It is important to bear in mind that life-threatening bleeding is associated with a six- to nine-fold increase in 30-day mortality after procedure and acts as an independent predictor of 1-year mortality [4]. Therefore, for clinical decision-making on antithrombotic treatment, it is important to find a balance between prevention of ischaemic complications and avoidance of bleeding risk. The recently published study by Nijenhuis et al. addresses this clinical dilemma regarding decision-making on anticoagulation treatment of elderly patients treated with TAVI [5]. As pointed out by the authors, the current European and American guidelines merely provide recommendations based on retrospective registries. The European Society of Cardiology guidelines recommend a combination of low aspirin and a thienopyridine early after TAVI, followed by aspirin or a thienopyridine alone. In those cases where there is an indication for treatment with vitamin K antagonists, such as in atrial fibrillation, a combined treatment of vitamin K antagonist and aspirin or a thienopyridine is in general installed. However, the guidelines do not provide any recommendations on the duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). As observed in the survey undertaken in the Netherlands, a wide heterogeneity in the duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) and loading dose of clopidogrel was noted. In two-thirds of the centres (n = 9) DAPT was prescribed for 3 months. In one centre, where only transapical TAVI is performed, no concomitant clopidogrel was prescribed at all. The duration of concomitant clopidogrel was dependent on the type of prosthesis in only two centres according to the recommendations of the respective manufactures, 6 months versus 3 months for supra-annular Core Valve™ and intra-annular prostheses (e.g. SAPIEN™, JenaValve), respectively. Whether the decision on the duration of concomitant clopidogrel and its loading dose indeed should be dependent on the valve type (SAPIEN™ or Medtronic Core Valve™) or procedural approach (transfemoral or apical) has not been described in the literature. Moreover, clinical decision-making becomes more complex in circumstances where there is a high bleeding risk, PCI (<1 year) prior to TAVI, triple therapy pre-TAVI and new-onset atrial fibrillation. This is nicely illustrated in the survey of the participating centres showing different approaches to these scenarios. In conclusion, the appropriate regimen of antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapy following TAVI is undefined and warrants the conduction of randomised controlled trials for clinical decision-making in this steadily growing patient population.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.053 | 0.153 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.059 | 0.010 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".