Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30988448›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Cardiology2019

Tricuspid valve disease: diagnosis, prognosis and management of a rapidly evolving field.

Lluis Asmarats, Maurizio Taramasso, Josep Rodés-Cabau

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Cardiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed
8.4field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

36 citing papers in PubMed, 90 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Lluis AsmaratsQuebec Heart and Lung Institute, Laval University, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada.
Maurizio TaramassoUniversitätsSpital Zürich, University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.
Josep Rodés-CabauQuebec Heart and Lung Institute, Laval University, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada. josep.rodes@criucpq.ulaval.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8237-7095
Université Laval · CAUniversity of Zurich · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Tricuspid valve disease, and particularly tricuspid regurgitation, is a highly prevalent condition with a complex pathophysiology and long-term adverse consequences. Although historically neglected, tricuspid valve disease has gained increasing recognition, with important advances in the assessment and management of this disorder over the past 2 decades. Surgical treatment remains the standard of care, but it continues to have one of the the highest death rates among all cardiac valve-related procedures, and a broad range of patients still do not receive effective therapy for tricuspid valve disease in contemporary clinical practice. Therefore, several alternative, less-invasive technologies for treating patients with severe, native tricuspid valve disease at high surgical risk have been developed in the past decade, with promising early results. This Review summarizes key findings and highlights the latest developments in the diagnosis and management framework that are transforming clinical practice in the complex field of tricuspid valve disease.

Indexed as

Heart Valve Prosthesis ImplantationCardiac Valve AnnuloplastyEchocardiography, Three-DimensionalHumansPatient SelectionPractice Guidelines as TopicPrognosisRisk AssessmentTricuspid Valve InsufficiencyTricuspid Valve Stenosis

Identifiers

PMID30988448
OpenAlexW2936686306

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.