Avoidance of urinary catheterization to minimize in-hospital complications after transcatheter aortic valve implantation: An observational study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Contemporary transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) devices and approach present opportunities to review historical practices initially informed by early treatment development and cardiac surgery. The avoidance of urinary catheterization in the older TAVI population is a strategy to minimize in-hospital complications. The purpose of the study was to explore elimination-related complications following the phased implementation of a default strategy of avoiding urinary catheterization in patients undergoing transfemoral (TF) TAVI. METHODS: We conducted an observational study using a retrospective chart review of patients treated between 2011 and 2013 to identify patient characteristics, peri-procedure details, in-hospital outcomes and elimination-related complications in patients who did or did not receive a peri-procedure indwelling catheter. Descriptive analyses were used to report differences between the groups; we conducted a regression analysis to explore the relationship between the practice of urinary catheterization and total procedure time. RESULTS: Of the 408 patients who underwent TF TAVR, 188 (46.1%) received a peri-procedure indwelling urinary catheter and 220 (53.9%) did not. There was no difference in in-hospital mortality (2.2%), disabling stroke (0.5%), or other major cardiac adverse events. The avoidance of a urinary catheter resulted in significantly lower rates of urinary tract infection requiring a new antibiotic regimen (1.4% versus 6.1%, p = 0.014), haematuria documented by medicine or nursing (3.7% versus 17.6%, p = 0.001), and the need for continuous bladder irrigation (2.7% versus 0%, p = 0.027). CONCLUSION: The avoidance of a urinary catheter may contribute to improved outcomes in patients undergoing TAVI. The intervention should be further evaluated within the broader study of minimalist TAVI.
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 | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".