Key result
Elevated CO2 gap shows limited prognostic value for 28-day survival after TAVR despite higher levels in non-survivors.
Why the study?
The CO2 gap has been suggested as a marker of cardiac output and outcomes, but its value for predicting 28-day survival and its relation to cardiac function in TAVR patients required evaluation.
Does the CO2 gap predict 28-day survival in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement?
Cohort (n=50)
No
Does the CO2 gap predict 28-day survival in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement?
Despite being significantly elevated in non-survivors, periprocedural CO2 gap does not independently serve as a reliable prognostic marker for 28-day survival following TAVR.
CO2 gap lacks reliable prognostic value for 28-day survival after TAVR; leaves open its role in larger prospective cohorts.
Background: The venous-to-arterial difference in partial pressure of carbon dioxide (CO2 gap) has been suggested as a marker of cardiac output and clinical outcomes. This study aimed to evaluate the CO2 gap as a prognostic indicator for 28-day survival in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and to explore its relationship with cardiac function and lactate levels. Methods: In this prospective cohort study, 50 TAVR patients were stratified based on their left ventricular ejection fraction (LV-EF) and survival status. Central venous and arterial blood samples were collected at five time points to measure blood gas parameters. The primary endpoint was the prognostic value of the CO2 gap for 28-day survival. Secondary endpoints included group differences in the CO2 gap, its correlation with lactate levels, and CO2 content analysis. Results: ROC analysis indicated limited prognostic value for 28-day survival. The CO2 gap was higher in non-survivors than in survivors (11.1 mmHg vs. 6.8 mmHg, p = 0.039), but showed no significant difference between individual time points. The CO2 gap between cardiac (LV-EF ≤ 50%) and non-cardiac (LV-EF > 50%) groups showed no significant difference. Lactate and CO2 gap showed no correlation, except at T2 in the cardiac group (p = 0.039, r = 0.525). CO2 content showed no significance, except at T5, where it was significantly higher in survivors (5.3 mL/dL vs. 1.1 mL/dL, p = 0.003). Conclusions: The CO2 gap did not emerge as a reliable prognostic marker for 28-day survival in TAVR patients. Further studies are needed to explore its clinical relevance.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Thiehoff et al. (2025) conducted a cohort in Aortic valve stenosis undergoing TAVR (n=50). CO2 gap was evaluated on Prognostic value of CO2 gap for 28-day survival (non-survivors vs. survivors) (p=0.039). The CO2 gap was higher in non-survivors than survivors (11.1 mmHg vs. 6.8 mmHg, p=0.039) but ROC analysis indicated limited overall prognostic value for 28-day survival after TAVR.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: