Back

The STRAT Clinical Risk Score to Predict Early Ischemic Stroke Post-TAVI: findings from the FRANCE-TAVI registry

Besutti, M.; Chopard, R.; Ecarnot, F.; Leclerc, M.; eltchaninoff, H.; Iung, B.; Gilard, M.; Commeau, P.; Akodad, M.; Benamer, H.; Beurtheret, S.; Cuisset, T.; Le Breton, H.; Van Belle, E.; Verhoye, J. P.; Cayla, G.; Schiele, F.; Desmarets, M.; Meneveau, N.

2025-08-05 cardiovascular medicine
10.1101/2025.08.01.25332651 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundPractitioners recommending transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) currently lack reliable tools to predict periprocedural ischemic stroke risk. We aimed to develop and internally validate a clinical risk score to accurately stratify this risk. MethodsUsing data from the nationwide, multicenter FRANCE-TAVI registry, we developed a clinical predictive risk score for 30-day ischemic stroke post-TAVI using multivariable logistic regression analysis. The model was internally validated through cross-validation techniques. ResultsAmong 62,747 patients, 1,712 (2.7%), experienced ischemic stroke within 30 days. Nine clinical predictors were identified, namely female sex, age >85 years, weight <60 kg, symptomatic status, history of stroke or transient ischemic attack, multiple (i.e., >1) episodes of acute heart failure, severe mobility reduction, diabetes, and creatinine clearance <60 mL/min. The resulting scoring model demonstrated good accuracy (Brier score, 0.17), moderate discrimination (C-index, 0.63), and excellent calibration as assessed by calibration plots, calibration-in-the-large, and calibration slope. The score categorized patients into low (90.2% of the population), intermediate (8.0%) and high-risk (1.8%) groups. Observed stroke rates increased progressively across these groups, from 2.25% in the low-risk group to 6.51% in the intermediate-risk group and 10.10% in the high-risk group. ConclusionsThis newly developed STRAT score is a clinical, practical, and effective tool for predicting early ischemic stroke in patients undergoing TAVI. It may help tailor preventive strategies. Further studies are necessary to externally validate this score and evaluate its impact on clinical decision-making.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.