Reducing Long‐Term Mortality Post Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Requires Systemic Differentiation of Patient‐Specific Coronary Hemodynamics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Despite the proven benefits of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and its recent expansion toward the whole risk spectrum, coronary artery disease is present in more than half of the candidates for TAVR. Many previous studies do not focus on the longer-term impact of TAVR on coronary arteries, and hemodynamic changes to the circulatory system in response to the anatomical changes caused by TAVR are not fully understood. Methods and Results We developed a multiscale patient-specific computational framework to examine the effect of TAVR on coronary and cardiac hemodynamics noninvasively. Based on our findings, TAVR might have an adverse impact on coronary hemodynamics due to the lack of sufficient coronary blood flow during diastole phase (eg, maximum coronary flow rate reduced by 8.98%, 16.83%, and 22.73% in the left anterior descending, left circumflex coronary artery, and right coronary artery, respectively [N=31]). Moreover, TAVR may increase the left ventricle workload (eg, left ventricle workload increased by 2.52% [N=31]) and decrease the coronary wall shear stress (eg, maximum time averaged wall shear stress reduced by 9.47%, 7.75%, 6.94%, 8.07%, and 6.28% for bifurcation, left main coronary artery, left anterior descending, left circumflex coronary artery, and right coronary artery branches, respectively). Conclusions The transvalvular pressure gradient relief after TAVR might not result in coronary flow improvement and reduced cardiac load. Optimal revascularization strategy pre-TAVR and progression of coronary artery disease after TAVR could be determined by noninvasive personalized computational modeling.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".