Cardiac Damage Staging Predicts Outcomes in Aortic Valve Stenosis After Aortic Valve Replacement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The prognostic value of cardiac damage staging classification based on the extent of extravalvular damage has been proposed in moderate/severe aortic stenosis (AS). The purpose of this study was to assess the association of cardiac damage staging with mortality across the spectrum of patients with AS following aortic surgical or transcatheter aortic valve replacement (AVR). We conducted a pooled meta-analysis of Kaplan-Meier-derived reconstructed time-to-event data from studies published through February 2023. In total, 16 studies (n = 14,499) met our eligibility criteria and included 12,282 patients with symptomatic severe AS and 2,217 patients with asymptomatic severe/moderate AS. For patients with symptomatic severe AS, all-cause mortality was 24.0%, 27.7%, 38.0%, 56.3%, and 57.3% at 5 years in patients with cardiac damage stage 0, 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively (stage 0 as reference; HR in stage 1: 1.30 [95% CI: 1.03-1.64]; P = 0.029; stage 2: 1.74 [95% CI: 1.41-2.16]; P < 0.001; stage 3: 2.92 [95% CI: 2.35-3.64]; P < 0.001, and stage 4: 3.51 [95% CI: 2.79-4.41]; P < 0.001). For patients with asymptomatic moderate/severe AS, all-cause mortality was 19.3%, 36.9%, 51.7%, and 67.8% at 8 years in patients with cardiac damage stage 0, 1, 2, and 3 to 4, respectively (HR in stage 1: 1.70 [95% CI: 1.21-2.38]; P = 0.002; stage 2: 2.20 [95% CI: 1.60-3.02]; P < 0.001; and stage 3 to 4: 3.90 [95% CI: 2.79-5.47]; P < 0.001). In patients undergoing AVR across the symptomatic and severity spectrum of AS, cardiac damage staging at baseline has important prognostic implications. This pooled meta-analysis in patients undergoing AVR suggests that staging of baseline cardiac damage could be considered for timing and selection of therapy in patients with moderate or severe AS to determine the need for earlier AVR or adjunctive pharmacotherapy to prevent irreversible cardiac damage and improve the long-term prognosis.
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 | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".