Statin therapy for patients with aortic stenosis who underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a report from a Japanese multicentre registry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Data on statin for patients with aortic stenosis (AS) who underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) are limited. The present study aimed to evaluate the impact of statin on midterm mortality of TAVI patients. DESIGN: Observational study. SETTING: This study included patients with AS from a Japanese multicentre registry who underwent TAVI. PARTICIPANTS: The overall cohort included 2588 patients (84.4±5.2 years); majority were women (69.3%). The Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk score was 6.55% (IQR 4.55%-9.50%), the Euro II score was 3.74% (IQR 2.34%-6.02%) and the Clinical Frailty Scale score was 3.9±1.2. INTERVENTIONS: We classified patients based on statin at admission and identified 936 matched pairs after propensity score matching. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The outcomes were all-cause and cardiovascular mortality. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 660 days. Statin at admission was associated with a significant reduction in all-cause mortality (adjusted HR (aHR) 0.76, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.99, p=0.04) and cardiovascular mortality (aHR 0.64, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.97, p=0.04). In the octogenarians, statin was associated with significantly lower all-cause mortality (aHR 0.87, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.99, p=0.04); however, the impact in the nonagenarians appeared to be lower (aHR 0.84, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.13, p=0.25). Comparing four groups according to previous coronary artery disease (CAD) and statin, there was a significant difference in all-cause mortality, and patients who did not receive statin despite previous CAD showed the worst prognosis (aHR 1.33, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.57 (patients who received statin without previous CAD as a reference), p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Statin for TAVI patients will be beneficial even in octogenarians, but the benefits may disappear in nonagenarians. In addition, statin will be essential for TAVI patients with CAD. Further research is warranted to confirm and generalise our findings since this study has the inherent limitations of an observational study and included only Japanese patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: UMIN000020423.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".