Health-Related Quality of Life After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Inoperable Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background- Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has been shown to improve survival compared with standard therapy in patients with severe aortic stenosis who cannot have surgery. The effects of TAVR on health-related quality of life have not been reported from a controlled study. Methods and Results- The Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves (PARTNER) trial randomized patients with symptomatic, severe aortic stenosis who were not candidates for surgical valve replacement to TAVR (n=179) or standard therapy (n=179). Health-related quality of life was assessed at baseline and at 1, 6, and 12 months with the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) and the 12-item Short Form-12 General Health Survey (SF-12). The primary end point was the KCCQ overall summary score (range, 0-100; higher=better). At baseline, mean KCCQ summary scores (35±20) and SF-12 physical summary scores (28±7) were markedly depressed. Although the KCCQ summary score improved from baseline in both groups, the extent of improvement was greater after TAVR compared with control at 1 month (mean between-group difference, 13 points; 95% confidence interval, 8-19; P<0.001) with larger benefits at 6 months (mean difference, 21 points; 95% confidence interval, 15-27; P<0.001) and 12 months (mean difference, 26 points; 95% confidence interval, 19-33; P<0.001). At 12 months, TAVR patients also reported higher SF-12 physical and mental health scores with mean differences compared with standard care of 5.7 and 6.4 points, respectively (P<0.001 for both comparisons). Conclusions- Among inoperable patients with severe aortic stenosis, compared with standard care, TAVR resulted in significant improvements in health-related quality of life that were maintained for at least 1 year. Clinical Trials Registration- URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00530894.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".