ArticleObstetric medicine2014
Pregnancy outcome and follow-up cardiac outcome in women with aortic valve replacement.
Article in Obstetric medicine, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Maternal, Valvular and Foetal Outcomes of Pregnancy Following Aortic Valve Replacement.European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Ross Procedure vs Mechanical Aortic Valve Replacement in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.JAMA cardiology · 2018Pooled it
- Sex Differences in Aortic Stenosis: From the Pathophysiology to the Intervention, Current Challenges, and Future Perspectives.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Pregnancy After Cardiac Surgery.Cureus · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo compare the maternal, fetal and cardiac outcomes in women who have undergone aortic valve replacement.
methodRetrospective observational study of all women with aortic valve replacement, who underwent a pregnancy (1998-2012). Maternal-, fetal- and valve-related cardiac outcomes were assessed.
resultsThirty-two pregnancies in 16 women with aortic valve replacement (nine bioprosthetic, six Ross and 17 mechanical) were evaluated. There were no adverse maternal events in the bioprosthetic and Ross groups but three in the mechanical group. Fetal loss rate was highest in the mechanical valve pregnancies (53%). One woman in the bioprosthetic group needed valve re-operation, and one woman in the mechanical valve group died. There was no difference in the change of Vmax over the follow-up between the valves (p = 0.25).
conclusionsThere was no difference in deterioration between aortic valve replacements during and after pregnancy. The highest risk of maternal and fetal complications occurred in the mechanical valve group.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.