MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Prosthetic Valve Endocarditis After TAVR and SAVR

2019· article· en· W2987552233 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfective Endocarditis Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsSt. Paul's HospitalInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHazard ratioValve replacementAortic valve replacementInternal medicineCardiologyIncidence (geometry)Aortic valve stenosisEndocarditisAortic valveRate ratioSurgeryStenosisConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Prosthetic valve endocarditis (PVE) is a rare but critical mechanism of valve failure and death after transcatheter and surgical aortic valve replacement (TAVR, SAVR) warranting further analysis in modern aortic valve replacement experience. We characterize the incidence, risk factors, microbiological profile and outcomes of PVE from the PARTNER trials and registries (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valve). Methods: We analyzed a pooled cohort of all patients in PARTNER 1 and PARTNER 2 trials and registries. Patients had severe aortic stenosis, were treated with TAVR or SAVR, and were analyzed with respect to development of PVE. PVE adjudication by a clinical events committee was based on modified Duke Criteria. The incidence, infection timing, organism, and association between PVE and all-cause mortality were analyzed. Results: 8530 patients were included. PVE occurred in 107 cases (5.06 PVE events per 1000 person-years over a mean follow-up of 2.69±1.55 years [95% CI, 4.19–6.12]). The incidence of TAVR-PVE (5.21 PVE per 1000 person-years [95% CI, 4.26–6.38]) was not significantly different from SAVR-PVE (4.10 per 1000 person-years [95% CI, 2.33–7.22]; incident rate ratio, 1.27 [95% CI, 0.70–2.32]; P =0.44). Temporal risk of PVE was similar for TAVR and SAVR, even after adjusting for competing risk of death (hazard ratio, 1.15 [95% CI, 0.58–2.28]; P =0.69). Through multivariable analysis, PVE was associated with baseline cirrhosis (incident rate ratio, 2.86 [95% CI, 1.33–6.16]; P =0.007), pulmonary disease (incident rate ratio, 1.70 [95% CI, 1.16–2.48]; P =0.006), and renal insufficiency (incident rate ratio, 1.71 [95% CI, 1.03–2.83]; P =0.04). Timing of PVE was similar between TAVR and SAVR (<30 days: 4.2% vs 8.3%; 31 days to 1 year: 52.6% vs 66.7%; >1 year: 43.2% vs 25.0%; P =0.28). Staphylococcus occurred more commonly after SAVR (58.3% vs 28.4% in TAVR; P =0.04). PVE was strongly associated with all-cause mortality after endocarditis diagnosis (hazard ratio, 4.4 [95% CI, 3.42–5.72]; P <0.0001). Conclusions: The widespread adoption of TAVR and application to lower-risk patients makes understanding mechanisms of valve failure increasingly important. PVE is an established mechanism of prosthetic valve failure post-SAVR and TAVR with unclear differences between approaches. We herein demonstrate in the largest trials and registries of TAVR that PVE remains rare, but often fatal, in modern AVR experience and that there is no difference in incidence, predictors, or risk of PVE between TAVR and SAVR. Clinical Trial Registration: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifiers: NCT00530894 (PARTNER 1), NCT01314313 (PARTNER 1IA), NCT02184442 (PARTNER 1IB), NCT03222141 (PII S3HR), NCT03222128 (PII S3i).

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.316

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.230
Teacher spread0.224 · 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