ArticleWorld journal of cardiology2020
Systematic review and meta-analysis of outcomes of anatomic repair in congenitally corrected transposition of great arteries.
Article in World journal of cardiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical Factors Affecting Survival in Patients with Congenitally Corrected Transposition of the Great Arteries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- [Diagnosis and treatment in a series of patients with cardiac corrected transposition of the great arteries (double discordance)].Archivos de cardiologia de Mexico · 2024Article
- Prognostic Implications of Progressive Systemic Ventricular Dysfunction in Congenitally Corrected Transposition of Great Arteries.JACC. Cardiovascular imaging · 2022Article
- Role of Echocardiography for Assessment of Cardiac Remodeling in Congenitally Corrected Transposition of Great Arteries.Circulation. Cardiovascular imaging · 2022Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTreatment of congenitally corrected transposition of great arteries (cc-TGA) with anatomic repair strategy has been considered superior due to restoration of the morphologic left ventricle in the systemic circulation. However, data on long term outcomes are limited to single center reports and include small sample sizes.
aimTo perform a systematic review and meta-analysis for observational studies reporting outcomes on anatomic repair for cc-TGA.
methodsMEDLINE and Scopus databases were queried using predefined criteria for reports published till December 31, 2017. Studies reporting anatomic repair of minimum 5 cc-TGA patients with at least a 2 year follow up were included. Meta-analysis was performed using Comprehensive meta-analysis v3.0 software.
resultsEight hundred and ninety-five patients underwent anatomic repair with a pooled follow-up of 5457.2 patient-years (PY). Pooled estimate for operative mortality was 8.3% [95% confidence interval (CI): 6.0%-11.4%]. 0.2% (CI: 0.1%-0.4%) patients required mechanical circulatory support postoperatively and 1.7% (CI: 1.1%-2.4%) developed post-operative atrioventricular block requiring a pacemaker. Patients surviving initial surgery had a transplant free survival of 92.5% (CI: 89.5%-95.4%) per 100 PY and a low rate of need for pacemaker (0.3/100 PY; CI: 0.1-0.4). 84.7% patients (CI: 79.6%-89.9%) were found to be in New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class I or II after 100 PY follow up. Total re-intervention rate was 5.3 per 100 PY (CI: 3.8-6.8).
conclusionOperative mortality with anatomic repair strategy for cc-TGA is high. Despite that, transplant free survival after anatomic repair for cc-TGA patients is highly favorable. Majority of patients maintain NYHA I/II functional class. However, monitoring for burden of re-interventions specific for operation type is very essential.
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.