Cited by 222Cardiac Valve Diseases and TreatmentsPalliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesAortic Disease and Treatment Approaches

Futility, Benefit, and Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Open access
Lindman, Brian R., Alexander, Karen P., O'Gara, Patrick T., Afilalo, Jonathan·2014·JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions

Abstract

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a transformative innovation that provides treatment for high or prohibitive surgical risk patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis who either were previously not referred for or were denied operative intervention. Trials have demonstrated improvements in survival and symptoms after TAVR versus medical therapy; however, there remains a sizable group of patients who die or lack improvement in quality of life soon after TAVR. This raises important questions about the need to identify and acknowledge the possibility of futility in some patients considered for TAVR. In this very elderly population, a number of factors in addition to traditional risk stratification need to be considered including multimorbidity, disability, frailty, and cognition in order to assess the anticipated benefit of TAVR. Consideration by a multidisciplinary heart valve team with broad areas of expertise is critical for assessing likely benefit from TAVR. Moreover, these complicated decisions should take place with clear communication around desired health outcomes on behalf of the patient and provider. The decision that treatment with TAVR is futile should include alternative plans to optimize the patient's health state or, in some cases, discussions related to end-of-life care. We review issues to be considered when making and communicating these difficult decisions.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jcin.2014.01.167

Cites

70 of 70 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Because patients who develop severe aortic stenosis are usually older adults, their symptoms may also result in part from normal aging, numerous comorbidities or frailty.

    “However, because patients who develop severe AS are usually older adults, these symptoms may also result, in part, from normal aging, numerous comorbidities or frailty202.”

    From Calcific aortic stenosis (2016) · cites this paper as [202]

    The Introduction’s “Anticipated Benefit of TAVR” section distinguishes patients whose main medical problem can be ascribed to severe AS, and “Geriatric Risk Stratification” describes comorbidities and frailty as prevalent in TAVR patients. These passages support the possibility that problems other than AS contribute to patients’ condition, but they do not specifically attribute the symptoms to normal aging or establish that frailty causes those symptoms. (LLM, conf=0.80)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Given the high prevalence of frailty and disability in this patient population, the relationship between valvular stenosis and overall quality of life is complex and variable.

    “Given the high prevalence of frailty and disability in this patient population, the relationship between valvular stenosis and overall quality of life is also complex and variable.202”

    From Calcific aortic stenosis (2016) · cites this paper as [202]

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • In general, TAVR is associated with a survival advantage compared with conservative management without aortic valve replacement.

    “Although, in general, TAVR is associated with a survival advantage compared to conservative (no AVR) management”

    From Calcific aortic stenosis (2016) · cites this paper as [202]

  • Aortic valve replacement is indicated in patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis both to increase life expectancy and to improve symptoms and quality of life.

    “AVR is indicated in patients with severe symptomatic AS both to increase life expectancy and improve symptoms and quality of life3;4;199;202;252;253.”

    From Calcific aortic stenosis (2016) · cites this paper as [202]

  • A sizable subgroup dies soon after TAVR or does not experience improved quality of life, suggesting potential futility of TAVR in some patients.

    “there is a sizable sub-group that dies soon after TAVR or does not experience an improvement in quality of life, suggesting potential futility of TAVR in some patients201;202;220;244;245.”

    From Calcific aortic stenosis (2016) · cites this paper as [202]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lindman, B. R., Alexander, K. P., O'Gara, P. T., & Afilalo, J.
Affiliations
  • Washington University in St. Louis (US)
  • Duke University (US)
  • Jewish General Hospital (CA)
Corresponding author
Lindman, Brian R.
Venue
JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-07
Volume
7
Issue
7
Pages
707-716
ISSN
  • 1876-7605 (ISSN-L)
  • 1936-8798
OpenAlex
W1973241413
Cited by
222
References
70
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 23 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 25 · 2015: 23 · 2014: 6
FWCI
4.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • Washington University Institute of Clinical and Translational Sciences (#UL1 TR000448, #KL2 TR000450)
  • BG Medicine
  • Roche Diagnostics
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Aortic Disease and Treatment Approaches
Keywords
transcatheter aortic valve implantation, aortic stenosis, futility of treatment, anticipated benefits, very elderly patients, multimorbidity, frailty, cognitive impairment, disability, risk stratification, end-of-life care, shared decision-making, quality of life
MeSH terms
Age Factors, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Aortic Valve, Aortic Valve Stenosis, Decision Support Techniques, Cardiac Catheterization, Heart Valve Prosthesis, Hemodynamics, Humans, Middle Aged, Prosthesis Design, Risk Factors, Severity of Illness Index, Geriatric Assessment, Comorbidity, Frail Elderly, Treatment Outcome, Medical Futility, Risk Assessment, Patient Selection, Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation, Patient Preference

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review