Impact of low-profile sheaths on vascular complications during transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: We sought to assess the impact of low-profile sheaths on vascular complications during transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). METHODS AND RESULTS: This retrospective single-study population comprised a total of 375 consecutive patients with severe aortic stenosis who underwent transfemoral TAVR from January 2008 to November 2012. Of these, 204 (54.4%) underwent TAVR using 14-18 Fr sheaths (low-profile sheath [LPS] group), and 171 (45.6%) using 19-24 Fr sheaths (high-profile sheath [HPS] group). Vascular complications and bleeding were defined according to the VARC-2 definitions. Lower-profile sheaths were associated with a lower incidence of major vascular complications (0.5% vs. 10.5%, p<0.001), as well as a lower rate of life-threatening or major bleeding (3.4% vs. 8.3%, p=0.038). Finally, at multivariable analysis, sheath size ≥19 Fr (adjusted odds ratio [OR]: 3.06, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.20-7.83; p=0.019) and a sheath external diameter/minimal femoral artery diameter ratio ≥1.05 (adjusted OR: 5.79, 95% CI: 1.29-15.92, p=0.022) were found to be the only independent predictors of major and minor vascular complications. CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of lower-profile sheaths has dramatically reduced the incidence of vascular complications after transfemoral TAVR, thus enhancing the safety of the procedure.
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 | 0.005 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".