Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28129780›Full record

Trial reportTrials2017

Manubrium-limited ministernotomy versus conventional sternotomy for aortic valve replacement (MAVRIC): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

Enoch Akowuah, Andrew T Goodwin, W Andrew Owens, Helen C Hancock, Rebecca Maier, Adetayo Kasim, Adrian Mellor, Khalid Khan, Gavin Murphy, James Mason

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Trials, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Minimal Access Aortic Valve Surgery.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2023
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Enoch AkowuahCardiothoracic Division, The James Cook University Hospital, South Tees Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Marton Road, Middlesbrough, TS4 3BW, UK.
Andrew T GoodwinCardiothoracic Division, The James Cook University Hospital, South Tees Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Marton Road, Middlesbrough, TS4 3BW, UK.
W Andrew OwensCardiothoracic Division, The James Cook University Hospital, South Tees Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Marton Road, Middlesbrough, TS4 3BW, UK.
Helen C HancockDurham Clinical Trials Unit, School of Medicine, Pharmacy and Health, Durham University, Queen's Campus, University Boulevard, Thornaby, Stockton-on-Tees, TS17 6BH, UK. helen.hancock@durham.ac.uk.
Rebecca MaierDurham Clinical Trials Unit, School of Medicine, Pharmacy and Health, Durham University, Queen's Campus, University Boulevard, Thornaby, Stockton-on-Tees, TS17 6BH, UK.
Adetayo KasimDurham Clinical Trials Unit, School of Medicine, Pharmacy and Health, Durham University, Queen's Campus, University Boulevard, Thornaby, Stockton-on-Tees, TS17 6BH, UK.
Adrian MellorCardiothoracic Division, The James Cook University Hospital, South Tees Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Marton Road, Middlesbrough, TS4 3BW, UK.
Khalid KhanCardiothoracic Division, The James Cook University Hospital, South Tees Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Marton Road, Middlesbrough, TS4 3BW, UK.
Gavin MurphyDepartment of Cardiovascular Sciences, University of Leicester, Clinical Sciences Wing, Glenfield General Hospital, Leicester, LE3 9QP, UK.
James MasonWarwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, CV4 7AL, UK.
Durham University · GBSouth Tees Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBJames Cook University Hospital · GBUniversity of Leicester · GBUniversity of Warwick · GB

Funding

British Heart Foundation RG/13/6/29947
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAortic valve replacement is one of the most common cardiac surgical procedures performed worldwide. Conventional aortic valve replacement surgery is performed via a median sternotomy; the sternum is divided completely from the sternal notch to the xiphisternum. Minimally invasive aortic valve replacement, using a new technique called manubrium-limited ministernotomy, divides only the manubrium from the sternal notch to 1 cm below the manubrio-sternal junction. More than one third of patients undergoing conventional sternotomy develop clinically significant bleeding requiring post-operative red blood cell transfusion. Case series data suggest a potentially clinically significant difference in red blood cell transfusion requirements between the two techniques. Given the implications for National Health Service resources and patient outcomes, a definitive trial is needed. METHODS/

designThis is a single-centre, single-blind, randomised controlled trial comparing aortic valve replacement surgery using manubrium-limited ministernotomy (intervention) and conventional median sternotomy (usual care). Two hundred and seventy patients will be randomised in a 1:1 ratio between the intervention and control arms, stratified by baseline logistic EuroSCORE and haemoglobin value. Patients will be followed for 12 weeks from discharge following their index operation. The primary outcome is the proportion of patients who receive a red blood cell transfusion post-operatively within 7 days of surgery. Secondary outcomes include red blood cell and blood product transfusions, blood loss, re-operation rates, sternal wound pain, quality of life, markers of inflammatory response, hospital discharge, health care utilisation, cost and cost effectiveness and adverse events. DISCUSSION: This is the first trial to examine aortic valve replacement via manubrium-limited ministernotomy versus conventional sternotomy when comparing red blood cell transfusion rates following surgery. Surgical trials present significant challenges; strengths of this trial include a rigorous research design, standardised surgery performed by experienced consultant cardiothoracic surgeons, an agreed anaesthetic regimen, patient blinding and consultant-led patient recruitment. The MAVRIC trial will demonstrate that complex surgical trials can be delivered to exemplary standards and provide the community with the knowledge required to inform future care for patients requiring aortic valve replacement surgery.

trial registrationInternational Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) ISRCTN29567910 . Registered on 3 February 2014.

Indexed as

Aortic ValveBiomarkersBlood Loss, SurgicalClinical ProtocolsCost-Benefit AnalysisEnglandErythrocyte TransfusionHealth Care CostsHeart Valve Prosthesis ImplantationHemoglobinsHumansInflammation MediatorsManubriumPostoperative HemorrhageResearch DesignRisk FactorsBiomarkersHemoglobinsInflammation MediatorsAortic valve replacement (AVR)Inflammatory responseManubrium-limited ministernotomyMinimally invasive aortic valve replacementRed blood cell transfusionSternotomy

Identifiers

PMID28129780
PMCPMC5273792
OpenAlexW2582208041

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.