ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2018
Eighteen years of clinical experience with a modification of the Bentall button technique for total root replacement.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Modified Hybrid Cardioplegia Strategy Associated with Reduced Postoperative Bleeding and Re-Exploration Following Bentall Procedures: A Retrospective Single-Center Observational Study.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2026Article
- Long term outcomes of valve sparing aortic root replacement versus conventional aortic root replacement using a mechanical prosthesis by propensity score matching.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Midterm follow-up of composite graft replacement of the aortic root (30-year experience)-remarkably safe, effective, and durable.JTCVS open · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe retrospectively reviewed our experience with the modified Bentall procedure and evaluated the short- and long-term results over a period of 18 years.
methodsBetween 1999 and 2017, 89 patients with a mean age of 57.3±13.9 years underwent the modified Bentall operation with a slight modification for the correction of aortic root disease.
resultsThe operative mortality was 1.1% while the overall early mortality rate, defined as death within 30 days of initial hospitalization, was 2.2% (2/89). Logistic regression analysis revealed that increased Euroscore and aortic cross-clamp times were associated with greater likelihood for complications. The overall survival rates for the 89 patients (including deaths occurred at the initial hospitalization) were 93.0% (SE =3.0%) at 6 months, 93.0% (SE =3.0%) at 1 year, 89% (SE =5.0%) at 5 years and 73.0% (SE =5.0%) at 10, 15 and 18 years. Multiple Cox regression analysis for survival identified that increased aortic cross-clamp time, increased age, having a concomitant cardiac procedure and increased NYHA Class were associated with greater hazard. Left ventricular remodeling was assessed by means of echocardiography preoperatively and 1, 3, 6 and 12 months postoperatively.
conclusionsAccording to our experience, the Bentall procedure is a safe procedure, provides optimal long-term survival and can still be regarded as the gold standard procedure for aortic root replacement.
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.