Sex-Specific Determinants of Outcomes After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Women account for a large proportion of patients treated with transcatheter aortic valve replacement, yet there remain conflicting reports about the effect of sex on outcomes. Moreover, the sex-specific prevalence and prognostic impact of frailty has not been systematically studied in the context of transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Methods and Results A preplanned analysis of the FRAILTY-AVR study (Frailty Aortic Valve Replacement) was performed to analyze the determinants of outcomes in older women and men undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement. FRAILTY-AVR was a multinational, prospective, observational cohort assembled at 14 institutions in North America and Europe from 2012 to 2017. Multivariable logistic regression models were stratified by sex and adjusted for covariates. Interaction between sex and each of these covariates was assessed. The primary outcome was 12-month mortality, and the secondary outcome was 1-month composite mortality or major morbidity. The cohort consisted of 340 women and 419 men. Women were older and had higher predicted risk of mortality. Women were more likely to have physical frailty traits, but not cognitive or psychosocial frailty traits, and global indices of frailty were similarly associated with adverse events regardless of sex. Women were more likely to require discharge to a rehabilitation facility, particularly those with physical frailty at baseline, although their functional status was similar to men at 12 months. The risk of 1-month mortality or major morbidity was greater in women, particularly those treated with larger prostheses. The risk of 12-month mortality was not greater in women, with the exception of those with pulmonary hypertension, in whom, there was a significant interaction for increased mortality. Conclusions The present study highlights sex-specific differences in older adults undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement and draws attention to the impact of physical frailty in women and their potential risk associated with oversized prostheses and pulmonary hypertension.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".