ArticlePediatric cardiology2021
A Modified Approach with Caval Transection for Supracardiac Total Anomalous Pulmonary Venous Connection: Comparison Between Conventional and Sutureless Surgery in 173 Patients.
Article in Pediatric cardiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Risk factors for postoperative pulmonary venous obstruction after surgical repair of total anomalous pulmonary venous connection: a systemic review and meta-analysis.Interactive cardiovascular and thoracic surgery · 2022Pooled it
- Sutureless Closure Versus Conventional Technique in the Primary Surgery of Total Anomalous Pulmonary Venous Connection: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Pediatric cardiology · 2022Pooled it
- Comparison of the Efficacy and Safety of Sutureless Technique Versus Conventional Surgery in the Initial Treatment of Total Anomalous Pulmonary Venous Connection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Pulmonary circulation · 2026Review
- Sutureless Technique for Primary Total Anomalous Pulmonary Venous Connection Repair: An Updated Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 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
10 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
The efficacy of primary sutureless repair for supracardiac total anomalous pulmonary venous connection (TAPVC) needs to be confirmed. This study aimed to compare the long-term outcomes between the conventional surgery and the sutureless technique with a modified approach in superior TAPVC. Between January 2008 and December 2018, 173 patients with supracardiac TAPVC underwent surgery either with the conventional procedure (n = 130) or the sutureless repair (n = 43). Multivariate analysis and competing-risk analysis were used to identify risk factors for early death and postoperative pulmonary venous obstruction (PVO), respectively. Among 173 patients who underwent repair of supracardiac TAPVC, 46 (28%) had preoperative PVO, and 22 (12.7%) had postoperative PVO. The sutureless group had a lower postoperative PVO rate compared with the conventional group (p = 0.027). The risk factors for death were age ≤ 28 days [odds ratio (OR), 11.56; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.33-100.47, p = 0.015], weight ≤ 3 kg (OR 9.57; 95% CI 1.58-58.09, p = 0.009), emergency operation (OR 19.24; 95% CI 3.18-116.35, p = 0.002), cardiopulmonary bypass time (OR 2.16; 95% CI 1.36-3.43, p = 0.003), cross-clamp time (OR 1.73; 95% CI 1.20-2.50, p = 0.022), and duration of ventilation (OR 1.11; 95% CI 1.02-1.21, p = 0.027). Age ≤ 28 days [Hazard Ratio (HR) 1.92; 95% CI 1.92-11.02, p < 0.001] and preoperative PVO (HR 41.70; 95% CI 8.15-213.5, p < 0.001) were associated with postoperative PVO. The sutureless repair is a reliable technique for supracardiac TAPVC. Age ≤ 28 days is associated with 30-day mortality and postoperative PVO.
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.