ArticleCardiology journal2024
Long-term outcomes and quality of life following implementation of dedicated mitral valve Heart Team decisions for patients with severe mitral valve regurgitation in tertiary cardiovascular care center.
Article in Cardiology journal, 2024. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Incidence of Underreferral to Multidisciplinary Evaluation in Severe Primary Mitral Regurgitation.Annals of thoracic surgery short reports · 2024Article
- Quality of life and functioning in chronic disease - what to assess in heart failure patients.Cardiology journal · 2024Article
- Heart team consultations for patients with severe coronary artery disease or valvular heart disease in the era of the COVID-19 pandemic: a single-center experience.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Article
- An Individualized Approach of Multidisciplinary Heart Team for Myocardial Revascularization and Valvular Heart Disease-State of Art.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study was purposed to investigate which treatment strategy was associated with the most favourable prognosis for patients with severe mitral regurgitation (MR) following Heart Team (HT)-decisions implementation.
methodsIn this retrospective study, long-term outcomes of patients with severe MR qualified after HT discussion to: optimal medical treatment (OMT) alone, OMT and MitraClip (MC) procedure or OMT and mitral valve replacement (MVR) were evaluated. The primary endpoint was defined as cardiovascular (CV) death and the secondary endpoints included all-cause mortality, myocardial infarctions (MI), strokes, hospitalizations for heart failure exacerbation and CV events during a mean (standard deviation [SD]) follow-up of 29 (15) months.
resultsFrom 2016 to 2019, 176 HT meetings were held and a total of 157 participants (mean age [SD] = 71.0 [9.2], 63.7% male) with severe MR and completely implemented HT decisions (OMT, MC or MVR for 53, 58 and 46 patients, respectively) were included into final analysis. Comparing OMT, MC and MVR groups statistically significant differences between the implemented procedures and occurrence of primary and secondary endpoints with the most frequent in OMT-group were observed (p < 0.05). However, for interventional strategy MC was non-inferior to MVR for all endpoints (p > 0.05). General health status assessed at the end of follow-up were significantly the lowest for MVR, then for MC and the highest for OMT-group (p < 0.01).
conclusionsIn the present study it was demonstrated that after careful HT evaluation of patients with severe MR at high risk of surgery, percutaneous strategy (MC) can be considered as equivalent to surgical treatment (MVR) with non-inferior outcomes.
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.