MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effect of Baseline Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction on 2-Year Outcomes After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

2019· article· en· W2972166054 on OpenAlexaff
Ariel Furer, Shmuel Chen, Björn Redfors, Sammy Elmariah, Philippe Pîbarot, Howard C. Herrmann, Rebecca T. Hahn, Susheel Kodali, Vinod H. Thourani, Pamela S. Douglas, Maria Alu, William F. Fearon, Jonathan Passeri, S. Chris Malaisrie, Aaron Crowley, Thomas McAndrew, Philippe Généreux, Ori Ben‐Yehuda, Martin B. Leon, Daniel Burkhoff

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation Heart Failure · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsInstitut national de psychiatrie légale Philippe-Pinel
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEjection fractionCardiologyInternal medicineHazard ratioAortic valve replacementProportional hazards modelHeart failureValve replacementStenosisAortic valve stenosisAortic valveConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Impaired left ventricular function is associated with worse prognosis among patients with aortic stenosis treated medically or with surgical aortic valve replacement. It is unclear whether reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is an independent predictor of adverse outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Methods and Results: Patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement in the PARTNER 2 trials (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves) and registries were stratified according to presence of reduced LVEF (<50%) at baseline, and 2-year risk of cardiovascular mortality was compared using Kaplan–Meier methods and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression. Of 2991 patients, 839 (28%) had reduced LVEF. These patients were younger, more often males, and were more likely to have comorbidities, such as coronary disease, diabetes mellitus, and renal insufficiency. Compared with patients with normal LVEF, patients with low LVEF had higher crude rates of 2-year cardiovascular mortality (19.8% versus 12.0%, P <0.0001) and all-cause mortality (27.4% versus 19.2%, P <0.0001). Mean aortic valve gradient was not associated with clinical outcomes other than heart failure hospitalizations (hazard ratio [HR], 0.99; CI, 0.99–1.00; P =0.03). After multivariable adjustment, patients with reduced versus normal LVEF had significantly higher adjusted risk of cardiovascular death (adjusted HR, 1.42, 95% CI, 1.11–1.81; P =0.005), but not all-cause death (adjusted HR, 1.20; 95% CI, 0.99–1.47; P =0.07). When LVEF was treated as continuous variable, it was associated with increased 2-year risk of both cardiovascular mortality (adjusted HR per 10% decrease in LVEF, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.07–1.27; P =0.0006) and all-cause mortality (adjusted HR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.01–1.16; P =0.02). Conclusions: In this patient-level pooled analysis of PARTNER 2 patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement, baseline LVEF was an independent predictor of 2-year cardiovascular mortality. Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifiers: NCT01314313, NCT02184442, NCT03222128, and NCT02184441.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.286 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations48
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation Heart FailureSame topicCardiac Valve Diseases and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207