Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33313767›Full record

ArticleInteractive cardiovascular and thoracic surgery2021

Biological versus mechanical aortic valve replacement in non-elderly patients: a single-centre analysis of clinical outcomes and quality of life.

Fabio Stocco, Assunta Fabozzo, Lorenzo Bagozzi, Chiara Cavalli, Vincenzo Tarzia, Augusto D'Onofrio, Giulia Lorenzoni, Valentina Chiminazzo, Dario Gregori, Gino Gerosa

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

Article in Interactive cardiovascular and thoracic surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. 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 1 institution in 1 country.

Fabio StoccoDivision of Cardiac Surgery, Department of Cardiac, Thoracic and Vascular Sciences, University of Padua, Padua, Italy.
Assunta FabozzoDivision of Cardiac Surgery, Department of Cardiac, Thoracic and Vascular Sciences, University of Padua, Padua, Italy.
Lorenzo BagozziDivision of Cardiac Surgery, Department of Cardiac, Thoracic and Vascular Sciences, University of Padua, Padua, Italy.
Chiara CavalliDivision of Cardiac Surgery, Department of Cardiac, Thoracic and Vascular Sciences, University of Padua, Padua, Italy.
Vincenzo TarziaDivision of Cardiac Surgery, Department of Cardiac, Thoracic and Vascular Sciences, University of Padua, Padua, Italy.
Augusto D'OnofrioDivision of Cardiac Surgery, Department of Cardiac, Thoracic and Vascular Sciences, University of Padua, Padua, Italy.
Giulia LorenzoniUnit of Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Public Health, Department of Cardiac, Thoracic and Vascular Sciences, University of Padua, Padua, Italy.
Valentina ChiminazzoUnit of Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Public Health, Department of Cardiac, Thoracic and Vascular Sciences, University of Padua, Padua, Italy.
Dario GregoriUnit of Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Public Health, Department of Cardiac, Thoracic and Vascular Sciences, University of Padua, Padua, Italy.
Gino GerosaDivision of Cardiac Surgery, Department of Cardiac, Thoracic and Vascular Sciences, University of Padua, Padua, Italy.
University of Padua · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe aim of this study was to evaluate short- and long-term clinical outcomes, including the perceived health-related quality of life, in patients younger than 65 years having undergone aortic valve replacement either with biological or mechanical valve prostheses.

methodsBetween 2002 and 2013, 242 consecutive patients <65 years of age underwent isolated aortic valve replacement at our institution, either with biological (n = 134, 55.4%) or mechanical (n = 108, 44.6%) prostheses. Survival, health-related quality of life, short- and long-term clinical outcomes and echocardiographic data were analysed with a retrospective, single-centre study. Propensity matching was performed.

resultsNo significant difference in survival was found between the 2 groups (mechanical versus biological: 100% vs 96.6% at 1 year, 98.2% vs 93.1% at 5 years and 92.3% vs 83.4% at 10 years after surgery, P = 0.091). For all the interviewed patients (n = 161, 66.5%), perceived quality of life at the latest follow-up was excellent. Need for reoperation was higher in the bioprosthetic group (8% vs 0%, P = 0.995), whereas the rate of major bleedings was higher in the mechanical valve group (3% vs 20%, P = 0.094). The mean and maximum transvalvular pressure gradients were 20.5 ± 9.7 and 37.4 ± 17.5 mmHg in the biological group and 14.8 ± 4.8 and 26.6 ± 9.2 mmHg in the mechanical group (P = 0.014).

conclusionsNo significant differences were found between biological and mechanical valves in terms of patients' survival, clinical outcomes and quality of life. Mean and maximum transvalvular pressure gradients were significantly higher in the biological group. The majority of patients would opt for the same prosthesis type, if asked to choose again.

Indexed as

Heart Valve ProsthesisHeart Valve Prosthesis ImplantationAortic ValveBioprosthesisHumansMiddle AgedProsthesis DesignQuality of LifeReoperationRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeAortic valve replacementClinical outcomesNon-elderlyQuality of lifeSurvival

Identifiers

PMID33313767
PMCPMC8906774
OpenAlexW3117709628

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.