Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33017215›Full record

ArticleCirculation2020

Comprehensive Ex Vivo Comparison of 5 Clinically Used Conduit Configurations for Valve-Sparing Aortic Root Replacement Using a 3-Dimensional-Printed Heart Simulator.

Michael J Paulsen, Annabel M Imbrie-Moore, Michael Baiocchi, Hanjay Wang, Camille E Hironaka, Haley J Lucian, Justin M Farry, Akshara D Thakore, Yuanjia Zhu, Michael Ma and 2 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Circulation, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Hydrodynamic ex vivo analysis of valve-sparing techniques: assessment and comparison.European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery · 2023
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  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

12 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Michael J PaulsenDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery (M.J.P., A.M.I.-M., M.B., H.W., C.E.H., H.J.L., J.M.F., A.D.T., Y.Z., M.M., J.W.M., Y.J.W.), Stanford University, CA.
Annabel M Imbrie-MooreDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery (M.J.P., A.M.I.-M., M.B., H.W., C.E.H., H.J.L., J.M.F., A.D.T., Y.Z., M.M., J.W.M., Y.J.W.), Stanford University, CA.
Michael BaiocchiDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery (M.J.P., A.M.I.-M., M.B., H.W., C.E.H., H.J.L., J.M.F., A.D.T., Y.Z., M.M., J.W.M., Y.J.W.), Stanford University, CA.
Hanjay WangDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery (M.J.P., A.M.I.-M., M.B., H.W., C.E.H., H.J.L., J.M.F., A.D.T., Y.Z., M.M., J.W.M., Y.J.W.), Stanford University, CA.
Camille E HironakaDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery (M.J.P., A.M.I.-M., M.B., H.W., C.E.H., H.J.L., J.M.F., A.D.T., Y.Z., M.M., J.W.M., Y.J.W.), Stanford University, CA.
Haley J LucianDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery (M.J.P., A.M.I.-M., M.B., H.W., C.E.H., H.J.L., J.M.F., A.D.T., Y.Z., M.M., J.W.M., Y.J.W.), Stanford University, CA.
Justin M FarryDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery (M.J.P., A.M.I.-M., M.B., H.W., C.E.H., H.J.L., J.M.F., A.D.T., Y.Z., M.M., J.W.M., Y.J.W.), Stanford University, CA.
Akshara D ThakoreDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery (M.J.P., A.M.I.-M., M.B., H.W., C.E.H., H.J.L., J.M.F., A.D.T., Y.Z., M.M., J.W.M., Y.J.W.), Stanford University, CA.
Yuanjia ZhuDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery (M.J.P., A.M.I.-M., M.B., H.W., C.E.H., H.J.L., J.M.F., A.D.T., Y.Z., M.M., J.W.M., Y.J.W.), Stanford University, CA.
Michael MaDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery (M.J.P., A.M.I.-M., M.B., H.W., C.E.H., H.J.L., J.M.F., A.D.T., Y.Z., M.M., J.W.M., Y.J.W.), Stanford University, CA.
John W MacArthurDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery (M.J.P., A.M.I.-M., M.B., H.W., C.E.H., H.J.L., J.M.F., A.D.T., Y.Z., M.M., J.W.M., Y.J.W.), Stanford University, CA.
Y Joseph WooDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery (M.J.P., A.M.I.-M., M.B., H.W., C.E.H., H.J.L., J.M.F., A.D.T., Y.Z., M.M., J.W.M., Y.J.W.), Stanford University, CA.
Maine Farmland Trust · USStanford Health Care · US

Funding

ANGIOGENIC TISSUE ENGINEERING TO LIMIT POST-INFARCTION VENTRICULAR REMODELINGR01HL089315 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI WOO, Y JOSEPH · 2008 to 2023
$6.4M
Biomechanical Optimization of Mitral Valve Repair OperationsR01HL152155 · NHLBI · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI WOO, Y JOSEPH · 2020 to 2025
$5.9M
NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL089315NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL152155
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMany graft configurations are clinically used for valve-sparing aortic root replacement, some specifically focused on recapitulating neosinus geometry. However, the specific impact of such neosinuses on valvular and root biomechanics and the potential influence on long-term durability are unknown.

methodsUsing a custom 3-dimenstional-printed heart simulator with porcine aortic roots (n=5), the anticommissural plication, Stanford modification, straight graft (SG), Uni-Graft, and Valsalva graft configurations were tested in series using an incomplete counterbalanced measures design, with the native root as a control, to mitigate ordering effects. Hemodynamic and videometric data were analyzed using linear models with conduit as the fixed effect of interest and valve as a fixed nuisance effect with post hoc pairwise testing using Tukey's correction.

resultsHemodynamics were clinically similar between grafts and control aortic roots. Regurgitant fraction varied between grafts, with SG and Uni-Graft groups having the lowest regurgitant fractions and anticommissural plication having the highest. Root distensibility was significantly lower in SG versus both control roots and all other grafts aside from the Stanford modification (

conclusionsIn this ex vivo modeling system, clinically used valve-sparing aortic root replacement conduit configurations have comparable hemodynamics but differ in biomechanical performance, with the straight graft most closely recapitulating native aortic root biomechanics.

Indexed as

Blood Vessel ProsthesisBlood Vessel Prosthesis ImplantationModels, CardiovascularPrinting, Three-DimensionalAnimalsAortaAortic Valve InsufficiencyHumansSwineaortaaortic aneurysmaortic rootaortic valvebiomechanicssinus of valsalvasurgery

Identifiers

PMID33017215
PMCPMC7531510
OpenAlexW3090810121

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.