Sex‐based differences in outcomes with bivalirudin or unfractionated heparin for transcatheter aortic valve replacement: Results from the BRAVO‐3 randomized trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Women comprise almost 50% of patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and previous studies have indicated higher rates of procedural complications and bleeding in women compared to men. It is unknown whether men and women demonstrate a differential response to bivalirudin versus unfractionated heparin (UFH) in TAVR. We sought to evaluate outcomes by sex and type of anticoagulant from the Bivalirudin Versus Heparin Anticoagulation in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement (BRAVO-3) trial of transfemoral TAVR. METHODS: BRAVO-3 was a randomized multicenter trial comparing transfemoral TAVR with bivalirudin versus UFH (31 centers, n = 802). The primary endpoint was 48 h major bleeding defined as Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type ≥3b. Major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) were a composite of 30-day death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. Net adverse cardiovascular events (NACE) were a composite of BARC ≥3b bleeding or 30-day MACE. We examined the outcomes in men and women. RESULTS: The total cohort included 49% women (n = 391, 195 received bivalirudin and 196 UFH) and 51% men (n = 411, 209 received bivalirudin and 202 UFH). Women were older than men with fewer comorbidities including coronary artery disease, atrial fibrillation, diabetes but similar EuroSCORE I. Women received smaller sheath and device sizes compared with men without differences in the use of vascular closure devices. At 48-hr post-TAVR there was no difference in bleeding or vascular complications in women compared to men. The use of bivalirudin did not result in significantly lower bleeding at 48 hr or 30-days compared to UFH. CONCLUSIONS: There was no difference in early outcomes with bivalirudin versus UFH in men or women undergoing contemporary TAVR. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| 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".