Effects of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation on Frailty and Quality of Life
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is an effective alternative to surgical valve replacement in high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis. Although measures of frailty have been used to attempt to predict outcomes in this population, few studies have demonstrated changes in these measures. METHODS: We performed a prospective, observational study of 171 patients undergoing TAVI, of whom 44 had maximal follow-up of 1 month and 50 had maximal follow-up of 1 year. Quality of life was assessed using the Minnesota Living With Heart Failure Questionnaire, Katz Index of Independence in Activities of Daily Living questionnaire, and patient perception of overall well-being. Frailty was measured using the 10-m walk test and handgrip strength testing. RESULTS: In the overall cohort, participants demonstrated improvements in quality of life metrics, but deterioration in 10-m walk test and handgrip at 1 month. These trends continued at 1 year. However, patients in the lowest quintile of handgrip and 10-m walk test demonstrated a trend of improvements in these metrics during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Despite improvements in quality of life after TAVI, no improvements in frailty were observed in patients at 1 year.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".