Transcatheter aortic valve implantation for high risk patients With severe aortic stenosis using the Edwards Sapien balloon‐expandable bioprosthesis: A single centre study with immediate and medium‐term outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TCAVI) is an emerging alternative therapy to open-heart surgery in high-risk patients with symptomatic aortic stenosis. METHODS: Between January 2007 and May 2009, 46 patients underwent TCAVI with the 23 mm or 26 mm Edwards Sapien bioprosthesis via either the transapical (TA-AVI) or transfemoral (TF-AVI) approach. All patients had an estimated operative mortality risk of >15%. RESULTS: A total of 46 patients (30 TA-AVI, 16 TF-AVI) with a mean aortic valve area (AVA) of 0.63 +/- 0.2 cm(2) and mean gradient of 54 +/- 16 mm Hg were treated. Predicted operative mortality was 25.3% by logistic Euroscore and 8.7% by Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk score. Procedural success was 93% in the TA-AVI group and 88% in the TF-AVI group. There was one intraprocedural death in the TA-AVI group. Overall 30-day mortality was 6.5% (2-TA-AVI, 1-TF-AVI). Four patients (9.5%) died from noncardiac causes after 30 days. Successful TCAVI was associated with a significant increase in AVA from 0.6 +/- 0.1 cm(2) to 1.6 +/- 0.6 cm(2) in the TA-AVI group and 0.6 +/- 0.1 cm(2) to 1.4 +/- 0.2 cm(2) in the TF-AVI group at a mean follow up of 7.4 +/- 4.4 and 8.3 +/- 5.0 months, respectively. At discharge, there was significant improvement in AVA (P < 0.0001), transaortic mean gradient (P < 0.0001), and mitral regurgitation (P = 0.01). At medium term follow up, the valve area was maintained and there was significant improvement in NYHA class in both groups (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: At medium term follow-up, both transcatheter approaches demonstrated good valve durability with no cardiac-related mortality post hospital discharge.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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".