Transcatheter heart valve failure: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: A comprehensive description of transcatheter heart valve (THV) failure has not been performed. We undertook a systematic review to investigate the aetiology, diagnosis, management, and outcomes of THV failure. METHODS AND RESULTS: The systematic review was performed in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines using EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Scopus. Between December 2002 and March 2014, 70 publications reported 87 individual cases of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) failure. Similar to surgical bioprosthetic heart valve failure, we observed cases of prosthetic valve endocarditis (PVE) (n = 34), structural valve failure (n = 13), and THV thrombosis (n = 15). The microbiological profile of THV PVE was similar to surgical PVE, though one-quarter had satellite mitral valve endocarditis, and surgical intervention was required in 40% (75% survival). Structural valve failure occurred most frequently due to leaflet calcification and was predominantly treated by redo-THV (60%). Transcatheter heart valve thrombosis occurred at a mean 9 ± 7 months post-implantation and was successfully treated by prolonged anticoagulation in three-quarters of cases. Two novel causes of THV failure were identified: late THV embolization (n = 18); and THV compression (n = 7) following cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). These failure modes have not been reported in the surgical literature. Potential risk factors for late THV embolization include low prosthesis implantation, THV undersizing/underexpansion, bicuspid, and non-calcified anatomy. Transcatheter heart valve embolization mandated surgery in 80% of patients. Transcatheter heart valve compression was noted at post-mortem in most cases. CONCLUSION: Transcatheter heart valves are susceptible to failure modes typical to those of surgical bioprostheses and unique to their specific design. Transcatheter heart valve compression and late embolization represent complications previously unreported in the surgical literature.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.024 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.005 |
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".