MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200312584 · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/suab147.023

595 Impact of age on outcomes in a large multicentre low-to-intermediate risk TAVI population: in and out the age cut-off from ESC 2021 valvular heart disease guidelines

2021· article· en· W4200312584 on OpenAlexaff
Alessandro Sticchi, Francesco Gallo, Stefano Benenati, Kim Won-keun, Arif Khokhar, Tobias Zeus, Stefan Toggweiler, Federico De Marco, Bernhard Reimers, Luis Nombela‐Franco, Marco Barbanti, Salvatore Brugaletta, Tommaso Piva, Josep Rodés‐Cabau, Italo Porto, Antonio Colombo, Francesco Giannini

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal Supplements · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinevalvular heart diseaseAtrial fibrillationInternal medicineDiabetes mellitusCohortPopulationCardiologyRetrospective cohort studySurgeryEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Aims The ESC 2021 valvular heart disease [VHD] guidelines introduced an important and debated age cut-off (75 years) to lead the choice between surgical and transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in non-high-risk patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate what impact an age cut-off has on clinical outcomes following TAVI in low-to-Intermediate Risk patients from a real word registry. Methods We performed the investigation in a large, contemporary, real-world, multicentre, international, retrospective registry of 3862 consecutive patients, comparing the rates of patient risk factors, procedural characteristics, complications, and outcomes in the populations with < or ≥ 75 years old. Results In our real-world cohort of 2977 patients with mean STS score of 3.6% (5.0–2.5), we found 301 (10.1%) patients with age <75 years and 2676 (89.9%) with ≥75 years. In the younger group compared with the older, we have a higher prevalence of male (44% vs. 35%, P=0.003), higher BMI (mean of 28.5 kg/m² vs. 26.7 kg/m², P = <0.001), diabetes (32% vs. 26%, P=0.027), insulin-dependent diabetes (12% vs. 7%, P=0.001), smoking (18% vs. 7%, P<0.001), COPD (26% vs. 16%, P<0.001). Moreover, younger patients presented less previous PM/ICD (6% vs. 11%, P=0.023), less atrial fibrillation (24% vs. 33%, P=0.033), less renal impairment (30% vs. 66%, P<0.001) and a lower mean STS score (2.6% vs. 3.7%, P<0.001). There was no difference in annular sizing, valvular and LVOT calcifications between the two groups. Older patients had a higher prevalence of porcelain aorta (2% for age<75 vs. 9%, P=0.001). Between the two groups no significant differences in procedural characteristics were observed, including rates of pre-dilatation (P=0.369), post-dilatation (P=0.159) and contrast volume (P=0.259). Procedural complications, in-hospital outcomes and 2-year Kaplan-Meier (KM) survival was equivalent between both groups (P=0.930). Finally, we assessed the best age cut-off related to 1-year mortality in our population, resulting in 86 years. Still, also in this scenario, the KM survival analysis did not show significant differences (P=0.120). Conclusions In our large real-world contemporary low-to-intermediate risk TAVI population, an age cut-off of 75 years was not associated with any difference in clinical outcomes and survival at 2-years follow-up. This data reinforces the concept that age alone is not a sufficient variable to be considered when choosing between TAVI or SAVR. The recent ESC 2021 VHD guidelines cut-off is justified only by the lack of evidence and valve durability strategy but not of a proper advantage age-related.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.775

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.367 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart Journal SupplementsSame topicCardiac Valve Diseases and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207